ms_gui_make_supercell_current

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions 'in place' implying modification but doesn't disclose whether the original is preserved, whether it's destructive, or any permissions needed. It references 'Materials Studio BuildSuperCell' but doesn't clarify side effects. Parameter calculateBonds has a good warning, but overall behavioral context is lacking.

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?

Single sentence that directly states the purpose without unnecessary words. Efficient and front-loaded.

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?

With 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the one-sentence description is insufficient. It omits context about return values, error conditions, overwriting behavior, or confirmation steps. More detail is needed for a tool that modifies the current document.

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 63% (5 of 8 parameters described). The tool description does not add any meaning beyond the schema; it only names the underlying method. For a moderate coverage, the description should have compensated but didn't.

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 action ('Build a supercell') and the resource ('current GUI periodic document'), with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like ms_gui_create_current or ms_gui_set_lattice_current by focusing on supercell construction. Minor vagueness in 'in place' prevents a 5.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., ms_gui_create_current for new structures, ms_gui_set_lattice_current for lattice changes). No exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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