create_tag

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the create action and use case but does not disclose whether tags must be unique, what happens if a tag name already exists, whether frame ranges are validated, or what the return value is. These are significant gaps for a creation tool.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and every word serves a purpose. It includes the operation, the target (frame range), and a contextual use case without any filler or repetition.

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?

The tool has 5 parameters and no output schema; the description gives the core purpose and context, but it lacks behavioral details like error handling or return values. The schema covers parameter semantics, but the description alone does not fully equip an agent to anticipate edge cases, leaving it incomplete for a straightforward creation tool.

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 provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all five parameters, including the enum for loop and examples for name. The description adds no parameter-specific details beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 but does not enhance understanding of individual parameters.

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 'Create an animation tag for a frame range,' which is a specific verb+resource combination. It also names the tool's purpose for walk/attack/idle/dodge cycles, distinguishing it from sibling tools like remove_tag and list_tags that handle other tag operations.

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 phrase 'Used for walk/attack/idle/dodge cycles in Lentera Pudar' provides clear context on when to use the tool, implying it is for creating named animation tags over frame ranges. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or contrast with alternative tools like rename_tag or remove_tag, which would move it to a 5.

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