place

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and it does disclose important behaviors: default socket snapping, snapRadius for choosing a socket, snap=false for free placement, and parent limiting snapping to one piece key. It doesn't state return values or confirm that the action mutates state, but the core placement mechanics are transparent.

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?

Three short sentences front-load the core action and then add only the snapping behavior that changes how the tool should be called. No filler or repetition.

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 an 8-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the main mechanics but omits useful context such as valid piece keys, default snapRadius, coordinate conventions, return/result information, and how this differs from nearby placement tools.

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 compensate; it explains x, z, yaw (degrees), optional y, snap, snapRadius, and parent. 'piece' is only implied by 'one piece' and parent's phrasing is cryptic, keeping this just below a 5.

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 identifies a specific action ('Place one piece at (x,z)') and the resource being acted on, and it covers the core placement parameters. It doesn't explicitly contrast with placement-related siblings such as place_fob or stack, so it stops short of a 5.

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 explains how snapping works and that snap=false enables free placement, but it gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like place_fob, stack, or move. There are no exclusions or conditions that route the agent to the right sibling.

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