physics_add_heat_transfer

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

No annotations are provided. The description lacks details on side effects, prerequisites (e.g., model existence), or whether the operation is destructive. It only states the action and return value without behavioral context.

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 concise with a clear structure (description, args, returns) in numpy docstring style. No extraneous content, but the args and returns sections are minimal.

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 of adding physics (likely modifying a model), the description is incomplete. It does not mention required model state, potential errors, or the nature of the return value. Without annotations or output schema, more context is needed.

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 has 0% description coverage. The description compensates by naming parameters and stating defaults ('all domains', 'current model'), but does not explain what 'Selection name for domains' means or specify valid formats. Adds moderate value beyond the schema.

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 'Add Heat Transfer physics for thermal analysis,' with a specific verb and resource. The tool's name and description distinguish it from sibling tools like physics_add (generic) and other specific physics adders.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as physics_add or other physics_add_* tools. The description does not include context for selection or exclusion criteria.

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