Scaffold a validated ExisJS schema.ts with the native tex validator and ResolveSchema to create idiomatic schema files.
Scaffolds an idiomatic ExisJS schema file (schema.ts) using the native tex validator and ResolveSchema.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | No | ||
| filePath | No | The path to the schema file to create (e.g., src/http/users/schema.ts). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'scaffolds' without detailing side effects such as file creation location, overwrite behavior, error handling, or the resulting structure. This is insufficient for a generation tool.
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, direct sentence that front-loads the primary action ('Scaffolds') and mentions the output file. There is no wasted wording.
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?
For a two-parameter generator tool with no output schema, the description is too sparse. It lacks usage context, side effects, and does not explain what a successful scaffold produces. An agent cannot fully understand the tool's behavior or prerequisites.
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 description coverage is 50% (only filePath has a description). The description adds no explanation for the 'name' parameter, leaving its role ambiguous. It does not compensate for the missing schema documentation.
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 scaffolds an ExisJS schema file (schema.ts) and mentions the specific validators used. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying the resource type (schema), so an agent can tell it apart from generate_boundary, generate_config, etc.
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 is provided on when to use this tool versus the sibling generate_* tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate use case.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.