add_fluid_domain

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether the tool creates, modifies, or deletes anything, what side effects occur, or what the output schema contains. The description is essentially empty of behavioral information.

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 short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. It contains only a parameter name and two values, with no structure or elaboration. While it is brief, it does not earn its place because it provides almost no useful information.

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?

For a tool with two parameters (one required) and an output schema, this description is grossly inadequate. It does not explain the tool's function, the expected input values, or the output. An agent cannot safely or correctly invoke this tool based on the provided information.

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?

The schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does mention 'domain_type: GAS, LIQUID.' which hints at possible values, but it doesn't explain what domain_type means, what object_name is, or how they relate. The description adds only a fragment of parameter meaning and fails to make the tool callable correctly.

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 'domain_type: GAS, LIQUID.' does not state what the tool does. It only lists possible values for a parameter. There is no verb, no resource, and no indication that this adds a fluid domain to an object. It fails to convey the tool's purpose entirely, making it a pure fragment rather than a description.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool or how it relates to alternatives. No context, no exclusions, no mention of prerequisites or conditions. An agent has no basis for selecting this tool over its siblings.

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