create_circuit

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

No annotations provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only states the creation action, with no details on side effects (e.g., does it overwrite?), initialization state, or required permissions. The agent gets minimal behavioral insight.

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 short sentence, which is concise, but it is essentially a tautology of the tool's name. It could include more useful information without becoming verbose. Content earns its place but adds minimal value beyond name.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and two optional parameters, the description should provide more context about the created circuit (e.g., default state, return value). It is incomplete for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior and output.

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% with Japanese descriptions for both parameters (size and title). The main description adds no additional parameter meaning. Per rules, baseline 3 is appropriate since schema already documents parameters.

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 '新しい回路図を作成' clearly states it creates a new circuit diagram, matching the tool name. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'create_loop_circuit', which likely has a similar purpose. Without context, an agent may not know which to choose.

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 'create_loop_circuit'. The description offers no context on prerequisites, when-not-to-use, or typical use cases. This leaves the agent without decision support.

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