Create raymarch scene

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

The description adds behavioral value beyond annotations by stating it creates a self-contained container and previews the output TOP. Since annotations only provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and openWorldHint, the description fills in creation and preview behavior.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the main purpose, and includes essential details without any filler. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

With 10 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main features, scene types, controls, and complementarity. It does not detail all parameters but the schema is fully descriptive. The agent has enough context to understand the tool's value.

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 coverage is 100% and descriptions in the schema are detailed. The tool description mentions controls and scene types, which maps to parameters, but does not add significant new meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 it creates a self-contained GLSL TOP raymarcher, lists three specific scenes, mentions live controls, and distinguishes itself as the 3D complement to create_shader_lib.

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 usage by calling it the 3D complement to create_shader_lib, but does not explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives like create_3d_scene or create_glsl_shader. No exclusion criteria or explicit context is given.

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