show

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It says 'shows a graphical representation' but does not disclose side effects: whether it changes representation of selected atoms/objects, overwrites previous, or affects all objects by default. More detail needed.

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 concise with two short paragraphs, front-loading the purpose. No unnecessary words, but could be more structured with bullet points for parameters.

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 tool modifies state (changes representation), the description should mention default selection behavior and that it affects the current view. It is adequate but missing behavioral context for a mutation tool with no annotations.

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 lists the allowed values for representation, compensating for the lack of enums in schema. It explains selection as a PyMOL selection string but does not elaborate syntax or constraints. Adds some value but not fully comprehensive.

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 shows a graphical representation and lists the available styles. It distinguishes from 'hide' implicitly but could explicitly differentiate from similar commands like 'as' or 'cartoon'.

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 vs alternatives like 'hide' or 'as'. It does not mention that it overrides current representation or that 'hide' should be used to remove representation.

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