add_text

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

The description discloses that font loading occurs ('loads font'), which is a notable behavioral trait. However, without annotations, it lacks details on side effects, error conditions, or performance implications. It captures some transparency but not comprehensively.

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 single concise sentence that front-loads the key action. It is efficient, though slightly more detail could improve clarity without sacrificing brevity.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It does not explain return values, default behaviors beyond position, or error handling, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 must compensate. It only adds meaning for the 'x' and 'y' parameters by mentioning 'optional position', but does not explain 'fontFamily', 'fontStyle', or 'fontSize' defaults, leaving significant gaps.

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 verb 'Add' and the resource 'text node', and mentions the side effect of loading a font. It is specific and understandable, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'add_icon_placeholder' or 'create_frame'.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'create_frame' or 'set_text_color'. The description does not include usage context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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