Save TouchDesigner project

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds critical behavioral detail: bounded native overwrite consent, fail-closed to Keep on timeout/error, no native dialog, and no raw Python fallback. It also discloses return values, which is valuable beyond annotations. No contradiction found.

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 dense sentences, each carrying essential information: main action, consent/fail-closed behavior, and return values. No filler or redundancy; front-loaded with the primary purpose.

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 tool's complexity (overwrite consent, fail-closed behavior, return metadata) and absence of output schema, the description covers all crucial aspects: path handling, timeout bounds, failure behavior, and return contents. An agent can invoke this correctly without additional details.

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 100% and both parameters are well-described. The description adds some nuance (e.g., 'fail closed to Keep' relates to timeout behavior) but mostly restates the schema's path and timeout semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 saves the current TouchDesigner project or performs Save As to an explicit path, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by being the only project-save action, with no ambiguity.

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 gives clear context: it works on the current project, requires a path for unsaved projects, and for existing paths requires overwrite consent. It also states explicit non-behaviors (never opens a native file dialog, never loads/quits, never falls back to raw Python), but does not name alternative tools or explicitly say 'when not to use'. This is a minor gap, so 4.

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