draw_circle

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the geometric definition, not how the tool behaves in practice, such as whether it appends to the current drawing, uses the active layer, or is a mutating operation. This is a significant gap for a drawing 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 concise sentence that conveys the essential information without redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

Despite its simplicity, the description is too terse. It omits any mention of drawing context, coordinate system, or layer behavior, and it does not help differentiate the tool from the many drawing-related siblings. An output schema exists, but the description still lacks critical operational context.

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 description explains cx and cy as the center coordinates and radius as the radius, which adds meaning beyond the parameter names. However, the layer parameter is not mentioned, and schema coverage is 0%, so the description only partially compensates for the lack of schema documentation.

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 identifies the tool as creating a circle with a center point and radius. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like draw_line and draw_rectangle, which have different geometry. The verb is implied by the tool name, and the description adds specific geometric parameters.

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. It does not mention prerequisites such as an active drawing, nor does it reference sibling tools or cases where other drawing tools would be more appropriate.

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