mmar_create_bendpoint

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that it creates a bendpoint, but does not mention side effects, validation, session requirements, or the return value. For a creation tool, this is insufficient.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action in the first sentence, and contains no unnecessary words. Every word contributes to understanding.

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?

The description is minimal but covers the core purpose. Given no annotations and no output schema, it lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., existing relationclass instance, session) and constraints (e.g., bendpoint sequence uniqueness). For a simple tool with 2 params, it is adequate but not complete.

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 input schema provides descriptions for both parameters (100% coverage), so the description does not need to add much. The tool description does not add parameter-specific details beyond the schema, but the schema's descriptions are clear, so the 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 action ('Create'), the target ('bendpoint'), the component ('relationclass instance'), and the rationale ('add waypoints to the connection line for routing'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like mmar_update_bendpoint and mmar_delete_bendpoint.

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 for adding waypoints but does not explicitly mention when to use it vs alternatives like update or delete, nor does it state prerequisites or exclusions. The phrase 'add waypoints' provides an implied use case, but there is no explicit guidance.

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