skip_objects

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It does state a key behavioral effect—skipped objects will not be printed—which is useful. But it does not disclose whether skipping is reversible, whether it applies to objects already in progress, or whether any confirmation or state change is returned.

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 short sentences with no redundant wording. The first sentence states the action, and the second clarifies the outcome. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with fully described schema fields, the description is mostly adequate. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it would benefit from clarifying whether the skip applies only before printing begins, whether it is reversible, and what state changes occur to the ongoing print.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no new meaning beyond the schema beyond restating that specific objects are skipped. The schema already explains object_ids come from print status and that printer is optional, so the description does not need to compensate.

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 identifies the action ('skip specific objects') and the resource ('a multi-object print'), and it adds the consequence that skipped objects will not be printed. It is distinct from sibling print-control tools like pause_print or stop_print, though it does not explicitly name an alternative.

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 phrase 'during a multi-object print' provides an implicit usage context, implying this tool is for excluding certain objects from a multi-object job. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this instead of pause_print or stop_print, nor does it mention prerequisites such as whether the print must be active or whether skipping is allowed after an object has already started printing.

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