Create launch plan

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool does not execute anything, stores results locally under .dashclaw-local/launches/, and associates each step with a guarded tool and reality check. Missing details like overwrite behavior or required permissions cap the score at 4.

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 concise—two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence defines the core action, and the second adds important details about tracking, non-execution, and storage. Perfectly front-loaded and efficient.

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?

The description explains the tool's purpose and behavior well but omits information about the return value or output format. Since there is no output schema, the description should at least hint at what the tool returns (e.g., the plan object or a confirmation). This gap prevents a higher score.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about the declared_stack being a subset of listed components, but the schema already enumerates these. No additional parameter semantics beyond the schema are provided, so a 3 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?

The description clearly states the tool creates a 'stateful launch plan' and explains its role as an ordered step checklist derived from the launch playbook for a declared stack. It distinguishes the tool from execution by noting 'nothing is executed.' This specificity and differentiation from sibling tools like preflight_launch or verify_launch earns a 5.

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 implies usage for planning a launch without execution, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus siblings such as preflight_launch (which likely checks readiness) or verify_launch (which verifies after execution). A clear 'use this before running preflight_launch' would raise the score to 5.

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