ms_gui_edit_current

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'queue' but does not disclose asynchronous behavior, how to check completion, undo capabilities, or any side effects. The list of operations provides some insight but misses behavioral details.

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 a single sentence that is concise and front-loads the purpose. However, it could be slightly more structured by breaking into bullet points or sentences for clarity. No redundant information.

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 the tool's complexity (17 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, the queueing mechanism, prerequisites, or the broader context of molecular modeling. The description leaves significant 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 only 24% (4 out of 17 parameters have descriptions). The tool description adds context for the 'operation' parameter by listing examples but does not explain critical parameters like x, y, z, name, exportFile, or documentName. The parameter meanings remain unclear.

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 'Queue' and the resource 'current GUI document', and lists specific operations like adding/deleting bonds, changing element, etc. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like crystal creation or lattice settings.

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 for basic molecule-building edits on the current document but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like ms_gui_create_crystal_current or ms_gui_set_lattice_current. No '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.