add_tile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses that the tile is added to the tileset, optionally filled with color, and returns an index. Missing details: destructive nature (tileset size changes), prerequisites (e.g., valid layer), and default insertion behavior.

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?

Two concise sentences: the first states the action, the second states the return value. No extraneous information. Front-loaded and efficiently worded.

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?

Given 4 parameters, 2 required, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not cover parameter meanings, behavioral constraints, or return value semantics beyond 'index'. The agent lacks critical details to use the tool correctly.

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 should explain parameters. It only mentions 'color' as optional fill. The required parameters 'filename' and 'layer' and optional 'frame' are unexplained, leaving the agent to guess their purpose.

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 'Add' and the resource 'tile to the layer's tileset', distinguishing it from sibling tools that modify existing tiles (e.g., set_tile, fill_tile) or perform other actions. It also specifies optional filling and return of index.

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 implies usage for adding a new tile but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like set_tile or fill_tile. However, the action of adding versus modifying is reasonably clear from the context.

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