Rectangular Array

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint=false annotation, the description discloses a important behavioral trait: rows x cols is unbounded, so even a 40x40 grid returns 1600 full records, making it a result-heavy tool. It also warns that fields=['handle'] is usually sufficient, which is valuable cost-awareness context not present in annotations.

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 compact and well-structured: the first sentence states the core action and return value, and the second paragraph adds a high-value behavioral warning with a concrete example. There is no redundant or filler 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?

For a 7-parameter create tool with an output schema, the description covers the most important contextual risk—large result sets—and provides a mitigation. It does not explicitly compare against entity_array_polar, but the schema and output schema carry the mechanical details, leaving only minor gaps.

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 100%, so the parameters are already well documented. The description adds one useful semantic hint—that fields=['handle'] is usually enough—but it does not further explain rows, cols, spacing, or compact beyond what the schema already provides.

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 operation: 'Create a rectangular array of copies' and explicitly says it returns info of all created copies. The 'rectangular' qualifier distinguishes it from sibling entity_array_polar while still identifying this as a create-type tool.

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 gives useful invocation guidance, such as recommending fields=['handle'] because the tool is result-heavy. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over entity_array_polar or other array/create alternatives, so the when-to-use vs alternatives dimension is only implied.

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