Create Leap Motion hand bus

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

With annotations already declaring readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, the description adds some context by specifying it creates placeholders rather than a fully functional setup. However, it does not disclose side effects like whether it overwrites existing nodes or requires a Leap Motion device to be present.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the tool's purpose and key components. Every word contributes value without being overly verbose.

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 scaffold tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basic components (CHOP/TOP placeholders, hand maps, gesture maps, setup notes) but misses important context such as how parameters affect the output, whether the scaffold is a standalone bus, and what 'active' means. It is adequate but incomplete.

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 only 33% (name and parent_path have descriptions). The description mentions 'hand maps' and 'gesture maps' which loosely correspond to hand_count and gesture_count, but it does not explain parameters like active, include_image_top, or how the scaffold is structured. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the parameter names.

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 creates a Leap Motion hand/gesture scaffold with specific components (CHOP/TOP placeholders, hand maps, gesture maps, setup notes). It uses a specific verb and resource, but does not explicitly distinguish itself from the similarly named sibling tool 'create_hand_gesture_bus'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisites, use cases, or exclude any scenarios. The word 'scaffold' implies early-stage setup but it is not stated explicitly.

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