auto_rig_weight

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds the constraint that UI is required, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not elaborate on destructive effects or what happens to existing weights, so transparency is partial.

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 concise sentence with no filler words. It front-loads the core action and adds the UI requirement efficiently.

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 tool with destructiveHint=true and no param descriptions, the description is too minimal. It doesn't specify prerequisites, error conditions, or behavior differences from similar tools. The UI requirement is mentioned, but overall completeness is low.

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 has 2 parameters with no descriptions (0% coverage). The description does not explain the parameters beyond the tool name itself; it relies on parameter names object_name and armature_name. This is insufficient compensation for the zero coverage.

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: 'Parent mesh ke armature dengan bobot otomatis' (Parent mesh to armature with automatic weights). This is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes from sibling parenting/weight tools like add_armature_modifier or assign_vertex_weights.

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 notes '(memerlukan UI)' (requires UI), which gives a condition for when the tool can be used. However, it does not mention alternatives or when not to use it, so guidance is limited to this single constraint.

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