Generate a test from a prompt

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

The description adds context beyond annotations by detailing the output (full file with one test() per behavior) and confirming read-only behavior. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint: true, but the description enriches with specifics.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words. Efficiently conveys all necessary information.

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 4 parameters, 1 required, no output schema, the description fully covers the tool's behavior, output format, and usage context. No critical omissions.

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 75%, and the description adds meaning: 'module' as import specifier, 'prompt' as plain-English behaviors, 'ticket' as seed. It clarifies optionality and complementarity of prompt and ticket.

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 'Generate a FULL node:test file (path + content) from a prompt and/or a ticket', specifying the output format and distinguishing it from siblings like save_generated_test.

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 says 'Read-only: returns the file for you to write under test/' and 'Optionally imports a target module', implying the tool is for generation only. It provides context for when to use, though alternatives like save_generated_test are not explicitly mentioned.

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