cocos_add_wheel_joint2d

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states it 'attaches' a joint without detailing behavioral traits like whether it modifies existing nodes, requires specific permissions, or has side effects. It mentions the joint's combined functions but not operational specifics like performance impact or error handling.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words, front-loading the core action and providing brief functional context. It's appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 high complexity (14 parameters, no annotations, 0% schema coverage) and an output schema present, the description is incomplete. It lacks parameter semantics, behavioral details, and doesn't leverage the output schema to explain return values, making it inadequate for effective tool use.

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 but adds no parameter information. It doesn't explain what parameters like 'scene_path' or 'anchor_x' mean, their units, or how they interact, leaving 14 parameters undocumented beyond schema titles.

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.WheelJoint2D'), with additional context about its function ('wheel + axle (slide along axis + spring + motor combined; vehicles)'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'cocos_add_distance_joint2d' by specifying the joint type, though not explicitly contrasting them.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other joint types in the sibling list) is provided. The description implies usage for vehicle-like physics but lacks context on prerequisites, constraints, or when to choose other joints.

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