write_file

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavior. It states the tool 'cria ou sobrescreve' (creates or overwrites), but it does not mention side effects like overwriting without warning, required permissions, or encoding. This leaves gaps in behavioral understanding.

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 a single, short sentence that efficiently conveys the core action. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource. However, it could be slightly more structured to include both creating and overwriting without relying on a slash.

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 simplicity (2 required parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficiently complete. It omits details such as whether directories are created automatically, the return value, or error behaviors. For a tool with no annotations, the description should provide more context to compensate.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, meaning no parameter descriptions are provided. The tool description does not explain the two parameters ('targetPath', 'content') beyond their names, failing to add value or clarify their meaning. For example, it does not specify that 'targetPath' expects an absolute or relative 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 the tool's purpose: to create or overwrite a text file. The verb 'cria ou sobrescreve' (creates or overwrites) combined with 'arquivo de texto' (text file) provides a specific action and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like append_file.

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?

The description indicates when to use the tool (to create or overwrite a text file). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, such as using append_file for appending content. The guidance is clear but lacks exclusion details.

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