Add a region

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

The description mentions the side effect 'Saves the map' but does not detail potential overwriting behavior (e.g., if outPath is not provided, it defaults to an edited file). With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but lacks depth on save behavior and safety.

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?

Two sentences with no redundancy. First sentence states purpose and parameter semantics; second covers return value and side effect. Each sentence adds value.

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?

With 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should provide more context about parameters like weatherEffect, color, and outPath. It is insufficient for a tool of this 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?

Schema coverage is 40%. The description adds meaning for left/right/bottom/top (world-coordinate bounds) and name (JASS usage) but ignores mapPath, weatherEffect, ambientSound, color, and outPath. It does not compensate for the low 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 tool adds a rectangular region with world-coordinate bounds and returns an assigned ID. It distinguishes from siblings like wc3_modify_region and wc3_delete_region by specifying 'add' and mentioning the return of a new region ID.

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 new regions but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like wc3_modify_region or wc3_read_regions. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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