spawn_actor

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only mentions the integration requirement. It does not state that spawning modifies the level, whether the operation is permanent, what side effects occur, or any permission/authentication requirements. This is a significant transparency gap for a creation tool.

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, efficient sentence that immediately conveys the core action and a key prerequisite. There is no wasted wording or redundant information, making it easy to parse and remember.

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 tool with 8 parameters, nested schemas, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It does not clarify what 'current level' refers to, whether the spawned actor is saved persistently, what the function returns, or any additional preconditions beyond integration. This leaves significant ambiguity for an agent.

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 provides 100% coverage of parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, such as clarifying the format of className or the world coordinate systems for nested objects. It is adequate but not enhanced.

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 tool's function: 'Spawn a new actor in the current level'. It uses a specific verb and resource, and the mention of 'current level' adds context. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like instantiate_template, as spawning directly from a class is a different operation.

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 gives a prerequisite ('requires Adastrea-Director integration') but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like instantiate_template or create_actor_template. It implies an intended use case but lacks explicit exclusions or alternative selection criteria.

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