distribute_objects

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not mention side effects, whether it modifies object transforms directly, or if it operates on selected objects or the provided 'objects' list. It lacks transparency about the mutation nature of the tool, which is important for agents.

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 a single, compact sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's functionality and mode-specific behaviors. It is well-structured and avoids unnecessary detail, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 description provides sufficient context for the tool's modes and main parameters, making its operation clear for typical use cases. However, it does not mention the return value or any preconditions (e.g., whether objects must be selected), and it omits the 'spacing' parameter. Overall, it is fairly complete but lacks a few operational details.

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 description explains the meaning of key parameters: axis (with defaults), mode (LINE, GRID, CIRCLE), radius, and columns. However, it does not mention the 'objects' parameter or the 'spacing' parameter, which are present in the schema. It covers the most critical parameters but not all, so it adds meaningful context but leaves gaps.

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's purpose: distributing objects in LINE, GRID, or CIRCLE patterns. It specifies the behavior for each mode (equal spacing along axis, grid layout with columns, circular placement with radius) and mentions default axes. This distinguishes it from other transformation tools like set_transform or randomize_transform.

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 explains how the tool works but does not explicitly state when to use it instead of alternatives. It implies usage for arranging objects in specific patterns, but lacks guidance on contexts (e.g., selecting objects, prerequisites) or comparisons with sibling tools. Adequate but not explicit.

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