create_block

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It never says whether the source entities are consumed/replaced, whether the new definition is attached to the document, what permissions or active document state are required, or whether the action is undoable.

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 short sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource. Nothing is wasted, but the terseness also means nothing is added, so it is efficient rather than exemplary.

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?

For a mutating tool with no annotations, no output schema and an undocumented nested base_point object with 3 required parameters, this one-liner leaves the agent without the behavioral or parameter context needed to invoke it confidently.

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 0% across 3 required parameters. The phrase 'from entity ids' loosely maps to the 'entities' array, but 'name' and the nested 'base_point' object (x/y required, optional z) are not clarified beyond the schema's own type constraints.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('create a block definition') plus the source of its content ('from entity ids'). It distinguishes the creation step from its clear siblings insert_block, explode_block and edit_block, though it never names them explicitly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus insert_block, edit_block or the primitive creators (create_box, create_sphere). No preconditions, no note on whether the source entities must already exist in the drawing.

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