cocos_add_tiled_map

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'Attach', implying a mutation operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like permissions needed, side effects, error conditions, or what the output schema contains. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 with two sentences that are front-loaded and waste no words. Every sentence earns its place by stating the purpose and providing a key usage guideline.

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 has an output schema (which reduces the need to explain return values) but no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It covers the basic purpose and a prerequisite but misses critical details about parameters, behavior, and context, making it only 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 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It adds no meaning beyond the schema, failing to explain what 'scene_path', 'node_id', or 'tmx_asset_uuid' represent or how they should be used. This leaves all three parameters semantically unclear.

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 verb ('Attach') and resource ('cc.TiledMap component'), making the purpose specific. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from its sibling 'cocos_add_tiled_map_asset' beyond mentioning it as a prerequisite, leaving some ambiguity about their distinct roles.

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 clear context by specifying a prerequisite ('Use cocos_add_tiled_map_asset to import first'), which helps guide when to use this tool. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or compare it to other alternatives, but the prerequisite is a strong usage hint.

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