create_diagram

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It mentions automated layout and styling but does not disclose side effects like file creation, required permissions, or potential errors. More information on behavior (e.g., overwrites files, network usage) would improve transparency.

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 two sentences (43 words), front-loaded with the purpose, and each sentence adds value. No unnecessary content.

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 100% schema coverage and an output schema, the description covers the main intent and usage. It could mention return format or error handling but is largely complete for a creation tool. Slightly incomplete for a new user.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents parameters well. The description adds no per-parameter detail beyond the schema, but it provides context like 'No need to specify coordinates' and mentions auto-styling via component_type. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Create a new Excalidraw diagram from structured node and connection data', using a specific verb and resource. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like export_diagram, get_diagram_info, mermaid_to_excalidraw, and modify_diagram.

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 that the LLM provides a relationship map and the tool handles layout, styling, and rendering, indicating when to use it. It also includes 'No need to specify coordinates', which guides the agent on what not to worry about. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use instructions or comparisons to siblings (e.g., modify_diagram).

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