add_junction

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It accurately describes the action (placing a dot) and adds a visual detail ('solid'), but it doesn't disclose any side effects, error behavior, or page requirements. The behavior is straightforward, but some context is still missing.

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 that conveys all essential information without unnecessary words or repetition. It front-loads the action and immediately specifies the location and context.

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 simple tool with only two numeric parameters and an output schema (per context), the description provides adequate context. It explains what the tool does and the condition for use. It doesn't go into extraneous detail, but given the tool's simplicity, the description is sufficiently complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain the parameters. The phrase 'at (x, y)' explicitly maps x and y to coordinates, giving them meaning beyond plain numbers. While it doesn't elaborate on units or origin, for a simple placement tool this is sufficient.

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 ('Place'), the object ('a solid junction dot'), and the location ('at (x, y)'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like draw_wire and add_label by specifying a unique resource, making its purpose immediately clear.

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 includes the condition 'for >=3-wire nodes,' which indicates when the tool is appropriate. It doesn't explicitly state alternatives, but the condition implies that this should not be used for fewer wires, providing clear context for its intended usage.

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