Create hand hologram

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

The description reveals key behaviors: defaults to a synthetic cube, open palm controls visibility, float anchor maintains height, opposite-hand pinch drives scale/glow and optional audio. It aligns with annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) and adds context beyond them.

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 paragraph of four sentences, front-loading the core purpose and key interactions. While somewhat dense, it avoids redundancy and uses each sentence to convey important details, earning a slightly above-average score.

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?

The description covers main behaviors and workflow but lacks explicit mention of the output (e.g., a hologram component) and does not guide when to adjust many of the 21 parameters. Given no output schema, more completeness would be beneficial, but the description still provides a functional overview.

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 partially compensates by explaining behaviors related to float_height, glow, pinch_scale_amount, and audio_mode, but many parameters (e.g., color, resolution, transparency) remain unexplained, providing moderate added value.

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 builds a palm-anchored hologram visual, specifies the default holographic cube, and details interactions like open palm visibility and pinch-driven scale/glow/audio, distinguishing it from other create tools.

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 use for hand-tracking holograms and mentions its connection to create_hand_gesture_bus, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions, leaving usage guidance implicit.

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