apply_modifier

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It mentions 'making its effect permanent', implying a destructive or irreversible action, but does not clarify side effects like whether the modifier is removed after application or if the original object data is altered permanently.

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 very short and efficiently conveys the core action, including a note on return type. However, it could be more concise by removing the docstring format, but overall it is well-structured with no wasted words.

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?

The tool has an output schema, but the description does not provide enough context about error conditions, prerequisites (e.g., modifier and object must exist), or what happens if the modifier is already applied. The minimal description leaves many gaps for agent understanding.

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 input schema has 2 string parameters with no descriptions (0% coverage). The description only restates the parameter names without adding any meaning, constraints, or examples. It fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 verb 'apply' and the resource 'modifier to an object' with the specific outcome 'making its effect permanent'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'add_modifier' which adds a modifier without applying it permanently.

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 'add_modifier' or 'remove_modifier'. There is no mention of prerequisites or conditions for applying a modifier.

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