plan-kimi

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds behavioral context about the --plan mode and structured output parsing, without contradicting any annotations.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and contains no superfluous information. Every sentence adds value.

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 no output schema, the description mentions the output structure (steps, files-to-touch, risks, open questions) and distinguishes from siblings. It could have briefly noted that it uses an external API, but overall it is complete enough for an AI agent.

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?

With 63% schema description coverage, the schema provides some parameter details, but the main description does not add any parameter information. It fails to compensate for the 37% of parameters without schema descriptions, especially model, timeout, and workingDir.

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 verb 'Generate' and the resource 'structured implementation plan', and explicitly distinguishes from sibling 'ask-kimi' by referencing the --plan flag and different system prompt.

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 provides clear usage context: 'Use BEFORE coding' and mentions the distinct sibling 'ask-kimi'. However, it does not explicitly list when not to use it or mention other potential alternatives like 'brainstorm'.

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