art.detail.pass

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the pass mutates the canvas, what effects it has, whether it requires an existing session state, or what side effects occur. The description only says a pass is 'run', leaving the behavioral profile almost entirely undisclosed.

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 one concise sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately short for a tool whose parameters are documented in the schema.

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 there is no output schema and no annotations, the description is too sparse to be fully actionable. It does not explain what a detail pass involves, what materials are used for, what side effects occur, or what the caller should expect after invocation. The presence of many related sibling tools makes this lack of context especially problematic.

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 schema provides descriptions for all three parameters, so the schema coverage is 100%. The description itself adds little semantic value beyond the schema, though 'single named' reinforces that pass_name should identify one pass rather than a batch or plan.

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 uses a specific verb ('Run') and identifies the resource ('a single named detail pass' on 'a canvas session'), which makes the basic action clear. However, 'detail pass' is domain-specific jargon and the description does not directly distinguish this from the many art.detail.* siblings such as execute, texture, or material.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus the numerous related sibling tools like art.detail.execute, art.detail.plan, or the specific pass tools such as art.detail.texture and art.detail.material. The phrase 'single named detail pass' implies a singular operation, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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