vrc_generate_expression_menu

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the output (menu structure + parameter list with memory usage) and that the result is imported into Unity. It does not contradict any annotations (none provided). However, it could mention whether the tool is read-only or if it requires a specific project state.

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 front-loaded with purpose and then parameter details. The examples are necessary but make it slightly lengthy. Overall, every part earns its place, and it is well-organized without redundancy.

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 tool's complexity (2 parameters, one complex JSON) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter format, and output. It lacks mention of prerequisites (e.g., need a VRChat project) or error handling, but is mostly complete.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description provides extensive detail: JSON array format for items with examples of each type, default for menu_name, and valid types. This fully compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 generates a VRChat Expression Menu configuration (JSON blueprint), specifying a specific verb and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like unity_setup_expression_menu which handle importing into Unity, or vrc_generate_animator which targets animators.

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 the tool is used for generating expression menu blueprints, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., unity_setup_expression_menu). No guidance on prerequisites or exclusions is provided, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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