generate_erd

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It helpfully discloses the generated contents (Mermaid diagram, data dictionary, index strategies, FK cascades, SQL DDL), but it does not state overwrite behavior, file-writing side effects, permission requirements, or error conditions.

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 definition is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every phrase describes a concrete output artifact, making it efficient and 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?

No output schema exists, so the artifact list is useful for understanding what will be returned. However, for a seven-parameter generator with low schema description coverage and no annotations, the definition still leaves input semantics and usage conditions under-specified.

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 29%, and the description mentions no parameters at all. The schema documents detail, outputPath, field type, and references, but projectName, entities, databaseEngine, templatePreset, indexes, and cascadeRules remain unexplained, so the description does not compensate for the coverage 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 gives a specific verb and resource: generates an Entity Relationship Diagram (ERD.md). It also lists the concrete artifacts included, so an agent can distinguish this documentation-generation tool from sibling spec generators such as generate_srs or generate_prd.

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 explains what the tool produces but gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no comparison to sibling tools. An agent must infer usage solely from the tool name and output description.

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