physics_add_collision

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

No annotations provided; description discloses mutation but omits details like idempotency, effect on existing physics, or failure conditions. Only basic behavior is stated.

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?

Very concise: one sentence for purpose, then bullet list for args. Front-loaded and efficient with no superfluous content.

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?

Adequate for a simple tool: explains purpose and parameters. Minor gaps: no units for thickness_outer, no value constraints. No output schema needed.

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 0%, so description compensates partially: lists parameters with brief explanations (e.g., 'thickness_outer: Collision surface thickness'), but lacks units, range, or impact details.

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 collision physics to an object (makes it a collider for cloth/particles)', specifying the verb, resource, and differentiating from siblings like physics_add_cloth or physics_add_rigid_body.

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 implies use for making objects colliders for cloth/particles, but lacks explicit when-not or alternative tool names. No guidance on prerequisites or exclusions.

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