armature_add_bone

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only describes parameters, omitting side effects (e.g., irreversible modification, selection changes), permissions, mode requirements, or return behavior. This is insufficient for a mutation 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 concise with a clear, structured list of parameters. It front-loads the purpose and uses a single sentence per parameter. Every sentence adds value.

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 simplicity of the tool (adding a bone), the description covers basic usage and parameters. However, it lacks details on return values, error handling, or prerequisites (e.g., armature in edit mode). Without output schema, these gaps are noticeable but not critical.

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 adds meaning beyond the input schema by explaining each parameter's purpose (e.g., head/tail positions, parent_bone, connected). Schema coverage is 0%, so the burden is fully on the description. It partially compensates but could specify formats (e.g., head/tail as [x,y,z] floats).

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 specific action 'Add a bone to an existing armature.' The verb 'add' and resource 'bone' are precise. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'armature_create' (creating a new armature) and 'armature_add_bones_chain' (adding a chain of bones).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'armature_add_bones_chain' or 'armature_create'. It lacks explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use context, prerequisites like requiring edit mode, or error conditions.

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