draw_polyline

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only explains the closed parameter and does not mention layer handling, coordinate expectations, side effects, or return values. This lack of detail could leave an agent uncertain about the tool's behavior beyond the basic polygon creation.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded, conveying the essential behavior in a single compact phrase. Every word adds value, and the structure is easy to parse.

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 simple drawing tool, the description covers the core points and closed behavior, but lacks context about layer usage, coordinate system, and relationship to other drawing commands. Since an output schema exists, return values are not needed, but overall completeness is moderate.

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 clarifies the points format as [[x,y],...] and the meaning of closed=true, adding value beyond the bare schema. However, the layer parameter is not mentioned, leaving one of three parameters undocumented despite 0% schema coverage. This is a partial but incomplete compensation.

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 identifies the tool as creating a polyline through a list of [x,y] points, and mentions the closed option. It is distinguishable from sibling drawing tools like draw_line or draw_circle, though it lacks an explicit verb. The tool name 'draw_polyline' reinforces the intended action.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as draw_line or draw_spline. There are no use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions mentioned. The 'closed=true' hint is a parameter detail, not usage context.

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