Plumb · studio page (compose a product page)

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

Description adds context beyond annotations: it instantiates component library and reuses brand imagery, implying mutation and non-idempotency (matching annotations). It also explains the output structure and follow-up actions. However, it could be more explicit about potential side effects like overwriting existing pages.

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?

Description is fairly concise with no wasted sentences; each sentence serves a purpose (step number, action, output, instructions, requirements). Slightly wordy but well-structured.

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, the description fully explains the return value and what to do with it. It covers prerequisites, the flow ordering, and a high-level overview of the tool's action. Complete for this complexity.

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% with descriptions, so description adds only marginal value by contextualizing the 'kind' parameter as a list and mentioning sessionId's source. Baseline score is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states the tool composes a product page (specific verb+resource) and positions it as STEP 3 in a repeatable studio flow, distinguishing it from sibling tools like plumb_studio_start and plumb_review.

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 states when to use (after plumb_studio_start, before plumb_review) and that it should be called once per page. Provides clear context on the overall flow, though it doesn't explicitly describe when not to use it.

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