puppet_create_humanoid_rig

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explains auto-positioning for a 'standard humanoid layout on a 1080p frame', revealing key behavior. It does not mention return value or side effects, but for a creation tool, the behavior is reasonably disclosed.

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 succinct: one-line intro, requirements in a bullet-like list, then clear Args section. No redundant sentences, front-loaded with key purpose.

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 5 parameters, no annotations, but presence of output schema, the description covers input requirements, file naming, auto-positioning, and parameter defaults. It doesn't mention error handling or missing files, but is largely complete for this tool type.

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 description must add value. It explains image_dir requires absolute path, position_x/y default to center (0 = center), scale is overall multiplier. This goes beyond schema titles/defaults, providing practical semantics.

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 tool's purpose: 'Create a standard 6-part humanoid rig from a folder of images.' It specifies the verb 'create', the resource 'humanoid rig', and the input 'folder of images', distinguishing it from siblings like puppet_create_rig (generic rig) and puppet_animate (animation).

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 explicit prerequisites: 'Expects PNG files named: head.png, body.png...' but does not directly contrast with alternatives like puppet_create_rig or puppet_preset_motion. It implies use for standardized 6-part rigs, but lacks explicit 'when to use vs not' guidance.

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