scaffold-node-service

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says 'generate' and lists output files but does not disclose whether this overwrites existing files, requires authentication, writes to the current directory, or has other side effects. For a code-generation tool that likely creates files, this is a significant gap.

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?

A single, information-dense sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose and then lists the main content types, making it easy to scan.

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, no annotations, no output schema), the description is underspecified. It fails to mention important operational details like destination, overwrite behavior, dependency on VTEX IO CLI, or what success looks like. Schema covers parameter syntax, but the tool's overall behavior remains incomplete.

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 100%, so each parameter is already documented. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond referencing 'routes and events', which are already covered in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific action ('Generate'), a specific resource ('complete Node.js service scaffold for VTEX IO'), and enumerates concrete deliverables (index.ts, service.json, clients, middleware handlers). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like scaffold-vtex-app and scaffold-graphql.

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 implies when to use it: when a Node.js service scaffold for VTEX IO with routes and events is needed. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or conditions where another sibling scaffold tool would be more appropriate.

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