util_cbap

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior, but it only says 'Colors by atom, purple carbons'. It does not mention whether it applies to the current selection, if it modifies existing colors, or if it is reversible. The lack of detail leaves the agent uncertain about side effects.

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 but at the expense of clarity and completeness. It is a fragment that omits essential information, making it under-specified rather than efficiently structured.

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's simplicity (one optional parameter, many siblings), the description is incomplete. It lacks context on when to apply this specific color scheme, what the output schema provides, and how the selection parameter influences behavior.

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 0%, and the description does not mention the 'selection' parameter or its effect. The agent has no information on how to use the parameter, despite it being optional with a default of 'all'.

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 states 'Colors by atom, purple carbons', indicating a specific action (coloring atoms) with a specific target (carbons colored purple). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like util_cbab (likely blue) and others, though it could be more explicit about the scope (all atoms or only carbons).

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. The sibling list includes many similar util_cb* tools, but the description offers no criteria for choosing this one, such as when a purple carbon scheme is desired.

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