light.create

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

Annotations are absent, and the description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as side effects (e.g., adding the light to the scene), required permissions, or default behavior. The minimal description does not compensate for missing annotations, leaving significant behavioral ambiguity.

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 extremely concise (4 words), but conciseness comes at the cost of completeness. It does not earn its place by providing value beyond the tool name. A slightly longer description could improve clarity without sacrificing brevity.

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 the complexity of 9 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far from complete. The agent would need detailed information about parameter semantics, return values, and usage context to invoke the tool correctly. The current description is inadequate.

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 has 9 parameters with titles and defaults but no descriptions, resulting in 0% schema_description_coverage. The description does not mention any parameters or add meaning beyond the schema titles. The agent must infer parameter usage solely from the titles, which is insufficient.

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 'Create a light object' uses a clear verb and resource, indicating the tool creates a light. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'light.set' (which modifies lights) or 'object.create' (which creates generic objects). The purpose is clear but vague, lacking specificity about light type or context.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools such as 'light.report', 'light.set', and 'object.create' exist but are not referenced. The description offers no context for appropriate usage, leaving the agent to guess.

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