add_cloth_sim

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral context. It only mentions adding simulation, with no details on side effects, prerequisites (e.g., object must be a mesh), or potential failures. The return type is vague ('confirmation dict').

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?

Description is short and to the point: one sentence for purpose followed by parameter descriptions. No excess words, though structure could front-load the purpose more clearly.

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?

Tool performs a complex operation (cloth simulation) but lacks details on object requirements, behavior if conditions fail, or comprehensive return information. Output schema is present but not shown, and return description is minimal.

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 coverage is 0%, so description compensates by naming parameters and providing brief explanations: object_name as mesh object, quality with range (1-80), and mass in kg. This adds meaning beyond the schema's type and title.

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 'Add a cloth physics simulation to an object', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_fluid_sim and add_rigid_body.

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. Siblings include many simulation and physics-related tools, but the description offers no context for selection.

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