Create TouchDesigner node

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

Annotations indicate mutable (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false). Description adds validation against knowledge base, non-blocking warnings, and return format {node, warnings[]}, which is useful beyond annotations.

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 sentences: first states core action and caveat, second explains validation and return, third directs to alternatives. No redundant words, front-loaded with key function.

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 tool with no output schema, description explicitly states return structure. Covers creation, validation, warnings, and usage guidance. Lacks details on error cases but sufficient for an atomic primitive.

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%, so baseline 3 is appropriate. Description mentions validation of type against knowledge base and optional initial parameter overrides, but adds minimal extra meaning beyond schema.

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 precisely states the tool creates a single bare operator inside a parent COMP with no wiring or layout, and explicitly contrasts with higher-level create_* tools for complete networks.

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?

Explicitly advises when to use this atomic primitive vs higher-level Layer-1 tools (e.g., create_audio_reactive). Provides clear context for selection.

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