Add sprite

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavior/safety burden. It usefully discloses that the sprite is created empty and that opening it in the editor requires a costume first. However, it is silent on side effects, defaults for optional properties, whether a project must already be open, and 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?

Two short sentences, each carrying meaningful information: what the tool does and a critical prerequisite. The core action is front-loaded and there is no filler.

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 mutation tool with 10 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It covers creation and the costume prerequisite but omits project context, defaults, return behavior, and parameter semantics, leaving the agent uncertain about how to invoke it safely and correctly.

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% and the description provides no explanation for any of the 10 parameters (x, y, size, volume, visible, direction, draggable, layerOrder, rotationStyle). The only parameter-related hint is the costume prerequisite, but 'costume' is not even a parameter. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of parameter descriptions.

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 and object: 'Add a new, empty sprite.' This distinguishes it from sprite-modification siblings like set_sprite and patch_target, and from removal via remove_sprite. The word 'new' also signals creation rather than editing.

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?

It directly states when to use the tool (to create a sprite) and gives a clear workflow prerequisite: add at least one costume before opening it in the editor. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the creation context is clear.

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