starwind_init

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but lacks information on side effects such as file creation, overwrite risks, or idempotency. It explains the Pro default behavior but omits broader behavioral traits, so it is adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Two concise sentences front-load the purpose and default, with a clear alternative for existing projects. No unnecessary words; every sentence earns its place.

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 no output schema and moderate complexity, the description covers initialization purpose, default behavior, and usage alternatives. It lacks information on return values or error states, but overall is fairly complete for an init tool.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% (baseline 3), but the description adds value by explaining the Pro default and contrasting Pro vs standard setup. It does not elaborate on packageManager or cwd, but the existing context is helpful.

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 the tool initializes a new Starwind UI project and defaults to Pro setup, distinguishing it from the alternative for existing projects (starwind setup --yes). It effectively differentiates from sibling tools like starwind_add, starwind_docs, and starwind_search.

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?

Explicitly advises against using this tool for already initialized projects and directs users to 'starwind setup --yes' for adding Pro support, providing clear when-not-to-use guidance and an alternative.

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