Output add tenability slices

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, but the description adds real behavioral context: identical slices are skipped (concretizing idempotency), the default height is 1.8 m, all five quantities are added unless limited, and it must run before the simulation starts.

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?

Front-loads the action and scope in a single dense sentence, then appends ordering and rule references. Efficient, though the bracketed rule ids and knowledge-search pointer add some scannable overhead.

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?

With no output schema and full annotation coverage, the description supplies everything an agent needs to call it correctly: what is created, defaults, deduplication behavior, and the required sequencing relative to sim_start. Nothing material is missing.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the bare enum values by spelling out that the quantities are VOLUME FRACTION of OXYGEN, CARBON DIOXIDE and CARBON MONOXIDE, and clarifies the story-ids vs absolute-z choice. The 1.8 m default and 'all five' default largely restate the schema.

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?

States a specific verb (add) plus a precise resource (horizontal tenability slices at floor + height per story) and enumerates the quantities involved (TEMPERATURE, VISIBILITY, O2, CO2, CO). An agent can distinguish this from sibling slice tools without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly states the timing constraint 'Run before sim_start (OUT-006, ASET-004)' and routes to bulc_knowledge_search for rule detail, giving clear context for when to invoke it. It does not name an alternative tool or a when-not condition, but no obvious sibling competes for this action.

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