draw_circle_at

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It only states 'draw', which implies mutation, but fails to mention what happens to existing content, whether it creates new elements or modifies existing ones, or any required permissions. The minimal description leaves significant gaps.

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, clear sentence with no extraneous information. It is front-loaded and efficiently communicates the core action. It earns its place without waste.

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 the tool has 9 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is egregiously incomplete. It fails to clarify parameter defaults, behavior for optional parameters, return values, or side effects. The agent lacks critical context to use the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description should explain parameter meanings beyond their names. It does not. While parameter names like 'center_x' and 'radius' are self-explanatory, others like 'create_if_missing' and 'fill' require context that is missing. The description adds no value to the schema.

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 'Draw a circle on a specific layer/frame' clearly states the action and the target resource (layer/frame). However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'draw_circle', which might draw on the current layer/frame without specification. This lack of sibling distinction prevents a perfect score.

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 'draw_circle' or 'draw_circle_at'. There is no mention of prerequisites, nor any hint about when this tool is preferred. The description leaves the agent without decision-making support.

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