iac_terraform_plan

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'preview', implying a safe read operation, but does not mention potential side effects like state locking, required permissions, or the fact that many Terraform plans are non-destructive. The [DANGEROUS] label is misleading without explanation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely short (one sentence), which is concise but at the cost of omitting essential information. It front-loads the danger warning but lacks structure or elaboration on key details.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (two parameters with no schema descriptions, no output schema, and a marker as dangerous), the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain what the plan output looks like, why confirmation is needed, or how to properly set the working directory.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

No parameter descriptions exist in the schema (0% coverage), and the description does not mention either 'workDir' or 'confirm'. The agent receives no guidance on what these parameters mean or how to use them, which is critical for a tool with a required boolean and a directory path.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it runs Terraform plan to preview infrastructure changes. It uses a specific verb and resource, and while it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like iac_terraform_state, the context makes the purpose understandable.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., iac_terraform_state or running a full apply). The [DANGEROUS] tag hints at caution but doesn't clarify prerequisites or safe usage conditions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.