create_rectangle

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

With annotations already indicating readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, the description adds the return shape ({ ok, nodeId, name, type }) and the default parent behavior (current page). This goes beyond the annotations and clarifies the mutation effect without contradiction.

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 the key information front-loaded: action, options, use cases, alternatives, and return value. No redundant or filler text; every sentence 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 creation tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the return value, default behavior, and sibling alternatives. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema covers all 6 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds light context about 'optionally sized/positioned' and 'default: current page' but does not add deeper syntax or format details 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 'Create a rectangle' with optional sizing/positioning and append behavior, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_frame and import_image by specifying use cases. This is a specific verb+resource+scope definition.

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?

Explicitly names alternatives: 'for a container that holds other layers use create_frame, and for placed bitmaps use import_image.' Also provides use cases (solid shapes, dividers, color blocks), giving clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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