create_emission

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

Description lacks disclosure of side effects: whether it replaces existing material, applies to selected object, or creates a new material slot. With no annotations, this is a significant gap.

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?

Two concise, front-loaded sentences with no redundant information. Every word 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?

Adequately explains purpose and two key parameters, but misses details on the 'name' parameter and overall behavior (e.g., object scope, material slot handling). With no output schema, more completeness would help.

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?

Adds meaning for color (explains RGBA format) and strength (threshold for visible glow in Cycles), partially compensating for 0% schema coverage. However, the 'name' parameter is not described.

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?

Description clearly states 'apply an emissive material to an object' with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like create_glass or create_metal by focusing on emissive (glowing) material.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus other material creation tools (e.g., create_glass, material_create_pbr). Only parameter hints for color and strength are provided, not usage context.

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