Create Wipeout

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

The description discloses an important behavioral nuance: it refuses fewer than three points and warns that a zero-area mask would hide nothing while still reporting success. This goes beyond the destructiveHint annotation, which only indicates non-destructiveness, by highlighting an edge case that could confuse users.

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, consisting of two sentences. The first sentence front-loads the main purpose, and the second sentence adds a critical edge-case warning without unnecessary fluff. Every word earns its place.

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 entity creation tool, the description is sufficient. It covers the main behavior, key constraint, and has an output schema that likely details return values. No major information gaps are apparent given the low complexity.

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 already provides full descriptions for both parameters (points and layer), including the requirement of at least 3 points. The description does not add significant new parameter semantics beyond restating the point count constraint, so baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 specific action ('Create a WIPEOUT') and its purpose ('hides drawing content behind its outline'), which distinguishes it from sibling entity creation tools like lines or circles. The use of the term 'WIPEOUT' is precise and unambiguous.

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 provides clear usage context by explaining what the tool does (hides content), implying the right scenario for use. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the unique function of hiding content differentiates it from related tools. The constraint about three points also guides correct usage.

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