lightprobe-analyze

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that directional lights are skipped and describes the outputs (influence bounds, density, probe parameters). It does not mention side effects or limitations beyond that, but is reasonably transparent.

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 three sentences: purpose, a clarifying exclusion, and usage guidance. Every sentence adds value, and the key information is front-loaded. No redundancy or wasted words.

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 no output schema, the description lists the returned data types (influence bounds, spatial density, probe placement parameters). It lacks detail on return format or structure, but is adequate for a single-parameter tool with clear sibling guidance.

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% with one parameter (cellSize) already described in the schema. The description adds a brief usage context (grid cell size for spatial density analysis) but does not significantly enhance understanding 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 the tool analyzes local lights (Point, Spot, Area) and returns influence bounds, spatial density, and probe placement parameters. It explicitly excludes directional lights, distinguishing it from other light-related tools.

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 explicitly says to use this tool before 'lightprobe-generate-grid' to determine optimal spacing, providing clear context. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use scenarios or alternatives, but the guidance is strong.

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