assign_vertex_weights

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true. The description adds no context about what happens to existing weights, whether weights are added to or replace, or any side effects. The misleading 'optional' index note also obscures behavior rather than clarifying it.

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 short sentence with no fluff, but it under-specifies essential details. It is concise but not effectively structured to convey necessary usage 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?

Five parameters, an output schema, and a destructive mutation are present, yet the description provides almost no contextual information. It fails to explain the return value, error conditions, or how the operation fits into a workflow, making it inadequate for an agent to use safely with only this description.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description was expected to compensate, but it only touches on vertex_indices (and incorrectly calls it optional). No explanation is given for 'mode' or 'weight', leaving these parameters semantically unexplained.

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 'assign weights' and the target resource 'vertex group', distinguishing it from sibling tools like add_vertex_group. However, the parenthetical '(indeks opsional = semua)' is misleading because vertex_indices is required in the schema, undermining clarity.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as auto_rig_weight or add_vertex_group. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., the vertex group must exist) or specific contexts where this tool is appropriate.

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