add_bone

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states the action without mentioning side effects (e.g., whether it modifies selection, requires edit mode, or affects existing bones). This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 filler. It front-loads the primary action and key parameters, and every word contributes to understanding.

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 an output schema exists (though not shown), so return values need not be described. However, the description omits prerequisites (e.g., the armature must exist, edit mode requirement) and any context about the operation's effect on the scene, leaving some gaps for an agent.

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. It mentions 'specified head/tail positions' (covering head and tail) and 'optional parent' (covering parent_bone), but does not detail armature_name and bone_name beyond inference from 'armature' and 'bone'. It adds some clarity over the schema (e.g., 'optional parent') but not complete compensation.

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 action ('Add a bone'), the resource ('to an armature'), and the key parameters ('head/tail positions and optional parent'). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like delete_bone, set_bone_property, and list_bones by conveying it is for creation, not modification or removal.

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 implies usage (use this to add a bone) but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. For a basic creation tool, this implicit guidance is adequate but not explicit.

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