map_apply_scene_spec

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions two modes (dry-run, apply) but fails to explain what 'apply' actually does (e.g., modifies workspace, side effects). The default of dryRun=true is not mentioned. The description lacks crucial information about destructiveness or required permissions.

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 a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the key action and resource. It is not verbose, though it could benefit from additional details without becoming overly long. Every word carries weight, but brevity sacrifices completeness.

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 complexity (a required nested object parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is far from complete. It does not explain the return value, the effects of the apply mode, or the structure of the SceneSpec. The tool needs significantly more documentation for reliable use.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only mentions 'SceneSpec map' but does not explain what the sceneSpec parameter contains or how to use it. The dryRun parameter is not described. Both parameters are poorly documented, leaving the agent without sufficient guidance.

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's purpose: to dry-run or apply a SceneSpec map into Workspace/MapDrafts. It uses a specific verb and resource, and the two modes (dry-run vs apply) are mentioned. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like map_validate, but the unique action 'apply' provides enough distinction.

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 when wanting to test or apply a SceneSpec, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., map_validate for validation, map_create_blockout for blockouts). No exclusions or context for appropriate use are given.

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