gh_cluster_expand

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

The description only states 'expand' without detailing side effects (e.g., whether the cluster is deleted, how inputs/outputs are handled). Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the action.

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?

Extremely concise but under-specified; lacks necessary details about the expansion process. A single sentence fails to convey critical information, making it insufficient despite brevity.

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 output schema exists but is not detailed here, the description still leaves gaps: no explanation of the expansion mechanism, effect on the cluster definition, or how it integrates with other Grasshopper components.

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 sole parameter 'cluster_id' has no description in the schema (0% coverage) and the tool description does not explain its format (e.g., GUID, name) or how to obtain it. No value added beyond the schema.

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 'expand' and resource 'cluster' to clearly state the tool's action. It distinguishes itself from sibling 'gh_cluster_create' by implying the reverse operation.

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 like 'rhino_block_explode' or prerequisites such as whether the cluster must be selected or exist in the current document.

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