gameobject-component-add

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the action and context but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether components can be added multiple times, error handling, or side effects. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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 consists of two focused sentences, front-loading the core purpose and then providing actionable guidance. No redundancy or extraneous information.

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 tool with two required parameters and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It explains how to obtain the inputs and the context (opened prefab or scene). It could mention that components are added fresh (not overwriting) or error scenarios, but overall it is sufficient for a straightforward add operation.

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 100%, so the input schema already documents both parameters with examples. The description adds value by referencing the prerequisite tools for finding parameter values, but it does not add new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 Component to GameObject in opened Prefab or in a Scene.' It uses a specific verb ('Add') and specifies the resource ('Component' on 'GameObject'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like gameobject-component-destroy and gameobject-component-modify by focusing on addition.

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 explicit usage guidance: 'Use gameobject-find tool to find the target GameObject first. Use gameobject-component-list-all tool to find the component type names to add.' This tells the agent when to use this tool and what prerequisites are needed, effectively differentiating from alternatives.

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