place_brick

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

The description transparently explains the tool's behavior, including coordinate system, rotation, and failure conditions. With no annotations provided, it adequately covers the behavioral aspects needed for correct usage.

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 description is concise and front-loaded with the primary function. It packs information efficiently, though minor structuring improvements could enhance readability.

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 complexity, the description covers tool behavior, parameters, and failure conditions. It does not describe success return, but an output schema exists, making this acceptable. The description is sufficiently complete.

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?

The description adds meaning for x, y, z, and rotation parameters, explaining their coordinate conventions and behavior. However, it does not explain 'part' or 'color' parameters. With 0% schema description coverage, it partially compensates but leaves gaps.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: placing a part with specific coordinate conventions and rotation. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'remove_brick' and others by specifying its function.

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 provides extensive usage guidelines, including coordinate conventions, rotation effects, and failure modes. It implicitly tells when to use the tool but lacks explicit statements about when not to use it or alternative tools.

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