draw_path

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. Only states 'Draw a path' with no info on side effects, idempotency, or what happens to existing content. The create_if_missing parameter hints at behavior but is not explained.

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 very concise (10 words) but at the cost of missing critical information. While brevity is good, under-specification reduces its usefulness. It earns a mid score for lacking substance.

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 7 parameters (0% coverage), no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is far from complete. It does not explain how to use points, what 'polyline' entails, or how it relates to other drawing tools. The agent would be left guessing.

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%, and the description does not explain any parameter semantics (e.g., format of points, meaning of color/thickness). The points schema is especially unclear (array of objects with arbitrary integer properties). The description adds no value beyond the schema's titles.

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 ('Draw') and resource ('path using a polyline') on a specific layer/frame. It distinguishes from siblings like draw_line (single line) and draw_polygon (filled polygon) by specifying 'polyline', but does not explicitly differentiate.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like draw_polygon or draw_line. No mention of prerequisites, when not to use, or explicit comparisons. The sibling list is provided but the description does not help in selection.

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