light_add

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only lists parameters without disclosing side effects (e.g., overwriting existing lights), error cases, or required permissions. The tool mutates the scene, but this is not articulated beyond the basic action.

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 structured docstring that is front-loaded with the main sentence. It is concise and easy to parse, though the 'Args:' section could be slightly more terse.

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?

The description covers all 8 parameters but does not explain parameter dependencies or provide examples. For a tool with no output schema, it adequately documents inputs but misses higher-level context like typical use cases or constraints.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds value by explaining each parameter (e.g., 'size: Light size (area size, point radius, spot cone)' and units for power/color). However, it lacks details on default behaviors or parameter interactions (e.g., which parameters apply to which light types).

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 'Add a light to the scene' with a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from other tools, though a sibling named 'add_light' exists but is not detailed.

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 'add_light' or other lighting tools. No prerequisites, exclusions, or context provided.

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