Preview world member edits

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context: operations are validated, returns an expiring change set, does not modify project assets, and referenced map files are never touched.

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 consists of two well-structured sentences with no redundant information. It front-loads the purpose and immediately clarifies key constraints.

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 readOnlyHint annotation and presence of an output schema, the description is largely complete. It covers validation, safety, and constraints. Minor gap: could mention that the change set is for subsequent application, but not essential.

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?

The description adds meaning beyond the schema by stating that additions require existing project-local .tmj maps and that members are addressed by their current array index under the world's revision pin. This clarifies constraints not present in the input 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 clearly states the verb 'validates' and the resource 'world's explicit map members' with specific operation types (add, move, remove). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on world-level operations and bounded constraints.

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?

Usage is implied by the description: use to preview world edits. However, no explicit guidance is given on when not to use it or how it compares to similar preview tools like tiled_preview_edits.

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