Now that that has been brought up, maybe a couple of words about it might be in order: First the disclaimer. it’s outdated, slightly buggy and the JavaScript behind it is just nauseous to read (I was just beginning with JS programming back then). It was made for an older I7 build and the syntax of some things and some default messages have since been changed. Secondly, one of the goals for that tool was to make it easier to see which default messages were inappropriate for the item in question so that they could be changed. The Object Response Tests extension later replaced that function and IMHO is much more better suited for the task.
The #1 problem with generators such as the Thing Creator and tools that turn transcripts into playable games is that writing a game is an organic process where you typically start with just the basic functionality and gradually add to it as you go on. These kind of tools assume that you have everything all thought out and that you actually know right from the start what to put in all the fields in the generator’s forms. (In project management terms you could say that they expect the process to follow a strict waterfall model.) I do think these kind of generators could be useful (think Adrift or Quest), but they really must be able to modify existing code so that you don’t have to make the exact final implementation right then and there.