create_drawing

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

The description only says 'Create a drawing', which matches the write operation (readOnlyHint=false). It does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as required permissions, side effects, or error conditions. With no annotations providing such info, the description is insufficient.

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 sentence, very concise and front-loaded with the verb. However, it is too brief to be highly informative; some additional context would improve it without sacrificing conciseness.

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 creation tool with 4 parameters and an output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what a 'drawing' is, what constitutes a 'raw Huly parent object', or how to use the parameters correctly. The presence of an output schema partially mitigates the need to describe return values, but overall completeness is low.

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 tool description does not add any parameter information beyond the input schema. The schema descriptions for parentId, parentClass, and space are minimal ('a string that will be trimmed') and not helpful. Only the 'content' parameter has a somewhat informative description. Overall, parameter semantics are poor.

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 states the action 'Create' and the resource 'drawing' with context 'under a raw Huly parent object'. It clearly distinguishes from other create tools by specifying the parent object type, but 'raw Huly parent object' is somewhat vague and could be more precise.

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 like create_document or other create tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, when-not to use it, or alternative tools.

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