spheroid

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the general visual effect and does not disclose side effects like whether it replaces existing representations, applies state changes, or how it handles invalid object names. The schema's note about object resolution helps, but the tool description itself remains minimal.

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 concise sentence that is front-loaded and contains no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple display command.

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 tool is simple and has an output schema, but the description alone lacks context about how the display state is modified and when to prefer this tool over siblings. The rich parameter schema covers object resolution behavior, but tool-level usage context is missing, making it minimally viable.

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 description coverage is 100%, so per rubric the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no parameter semantics, but the schema's parameter description already explains the object-name requirement and error behavior, making the baseline appropriate.

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 'Displays atoms as smooth spheres' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing this tool from siblings like show, hide, and cartoon. It conveys exactly what the tool does without ambiguity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'show' or 'cartoon'. It neither states explicit use cases nor excludes situations where other representation tools would be more appropriate.

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