design_add_composition_guide

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral disclosure burden. It implies a layer is added but does not explain side effects, whether existing guides are replaced or appended, permissions, reversibility, or return behavior.

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 short and front-loaded, with the core action stated first. Its type list is mostly redundant with the schema enum, but it remains appropriately sized and easy to parse.

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?

This is a 15-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, yet the description does not explain conditional parameter relationships, side effects, or what the operation returns. The schema documents individual parameters, but the description does not provide enough context for an agent to confidently use this tool in a complex guide workflow.

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 schema already documents all 15 parameters. The description lists the guide types, but this largely duplicates the 'type' enum in the schema and adds no meaningful detail about optional parameters or their conditional use.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Add a composition guide layer.' It also lists the supported guide types, which helps an agent understand the tool's scope. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling guide tools such as design_add_guide or design_add_custom_guide.

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 says what can be added but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or relevant siblings like design_add_guide or design_clear_composition_guides.

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