add_uv_map

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

The description only states the high-level action and does not disclose side effects such as whether the new UV map becomes active, how the optional 'set_active' parameter behaves, or what happens if the name already exists. Since no annotations are present, the description carries the full burden and fails to provide this information.

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 extremely short and contains no fluff, but it is under-specified. It lacks the detail needed to be properly informative and is too terse to be considered well-structured for an API tool.

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 complete absence of parameter descriptions, output schema, and any behavioral notes, the description is far from complete. An agent would not be able to correctly invoke this tool based solely on this description.

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?

None of the parameters (name, object, set_active) are described in the schema or the description. The description does not compensate for the 0% schema coverage, leaving the meaning and requirements of each parameter unclear.

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 '新增 UV 层' clearly identifies the action as adding a UV layer/map and distinguishes it from related operations such as remove_uv_map and list_uv_maps. It is concise and understandable, though it uses 'layer' instead of the more precise term 'UV map'.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_uv_maps, unwrap_uv, or remove_uv_map. The description provides no context for selecting this operation.

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