insert_part_from_library

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states it inserts a part and returns a message/screenshot, but lacks details on side effects, permissions, or failure modes. Incomplete for a mutation tool.

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 extremely concise with no wasted words, conveying purpose, parameter, and return in three short lines. Front-loaded with the main verb.

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 simple 1-param tool with output schema, the description covers basics but lacks usage context and behavioral details. Adequate but not rich enough given sibling tools and no annotations.

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 minimal meaning to 'relative_path' (says it's the path of the part to insert). Schema coverage is 0% so description compensates slightly, but it's largely restating the parameter name.

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 it inserts a part from the 'parts library addon', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_object' (creates arbitrary objects) and 'get_parts_list' (lists parts), so purpose is well-defined.

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 implies usage (inserting from parts library) but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No prerequisites or alternative tools are mentioned, so it's only adequate.

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