nla_push_down

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the full burden of behavioral transparency. It fails to explain side effects, such as whether the action is removed from the active slot, how the NLA track is affected, or if any data is overwritten. This leaves the agent uncertain about the operation's impact.

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 concise, containing a single action-oriented sentence without unnecessary fluff. It is well-structured and immediately readable.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity, the description omits critical context: the meaning of the 'object' parameter, any preconditions (e.g., having an active action), and expected outcomes. Without these details, the tool cannot be reliably invoked by an agent.

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 sole parameter 'object' is not described in the schema, and the description does not clarify what the object represents or how it relates to the operation. There is no added meaning beyond the raw string type, leaving the parameter's purpose ambiguous.

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 function: pushing the current action into an NLA track. It uses a specific verb ('push') and identifies the resource ('current action' and 'NLA track'), effectively distinguishing it from related tools like add_nla_strip or assign_action.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention conditions, prerequisites, or contrast with similar operations such as adding NLA strips or assigning actions directly.

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