create_boolean_operation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states creation of a boolean operation but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether original nodes are preserved or replaced), required permissions, or whether the operation is destructive. This is insufficient for a creation tool that modifies existing nodes.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and usage context. Every word earns its place; no fluff or repetition.

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 3 parameters with full schema descriptions and no output schema, the description is minimal but covers the essential action. However, it omits details like whether nodes must be on the same layer, the resulting object type, or error conditions. For a tool combining multiple nodes, this leaves gaps for reliable agent usage.

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 coverage is 100% with clear parameter descriptions. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, such as formatting constraints, order dependencies, or examples. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb 'Create' and the resource 'boolean operation' with explicit enumeration of operation types (union, subtract, intersect, exclude). It differentiates from sibling creation tools by specifying a unique functionality and mentions practical application ('complex icon shapes').

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 a usage hint ('useful for complex icon shapes') but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. Among siblings, no other boolean operation tool exists, so implicit uniqueness helps, but no exclusions or context-driven selection cues are given.

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