Scaffold a whole website from one spec

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, and the description confirms persistence ('persisted through the website store and rendered to site/'). It adds value by specifying where and how the site is stored, without contradicting annotations. However, it does not discuss error cases, overwrite behavior, or authentication needs.

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 with three sentences, front-loading the main purpose and contrast with set_site. Every sentence provides useful information without unnecessary fluff.

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 complexity (6 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description adequately explains the high-level functionality and persistence. However, it lacks details on return values, error handling, or idempotency, which would enhance completeness.

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%, so the description must compensate. It mentions title, tagline, theme, sections, and sub-pages, adding meaning beyond the schema for these parameters. However, it does not mention the 'project' parameter or explain the relationship between parameters, leaving a gap.

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: generating a whole site in one shot from a single spec. It specifies what it sets (home page title, tagline, theme, sections) and that it creates initial sub-pages. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'set_site' by contrasting one-shot vs field-by-field.

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 explicitly advises using this tool instead of set_site for bulk site creation and suggests pairing with the generate_site prompt. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list other alternatives.

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