sdd-template-render

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior, but 'Render an optional SDD scaffold' reveals nothing about side effects (e.g., file creation), permissions, rate limits, or whether it is read-only. Even its mutation impact is unclear.

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 short sentence, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It lacks essential details and does not effectively summarize what the tool does, making it low-value despite its brevity.

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 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is far from complete. It provides no information about when to invoke the tool, what it produces, or how it behaves, making it inadequate for correct selection and invocation.

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 only 33% (only featureName has a description), and the tool description adds no parameter information. It fails to explain templateType or customTemplate, leaving a significant semantic 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 uses 'Render' as the verb and identifies 'SDD scaffold' as the resource, but 'optional SDD scaffold' is ambiguous. It doesn't clarify what the scaffold is or how it differs from sibling tools like sdd-requirements or sdd-design, making the purpose vague.

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, what prerequisites exist, or how it relates to alternatives. The word 'optional' implies it may not be required, but there is no explicit context, exclusions, or mention of sibling tools.

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