design_add_pose_skeleton

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says an overlay is added but never states whether a new layer is created, whether it replaces an existing overlay, whether the operation is reversible, or what happens when no parameter is supplied. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, that is a significant gap.

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 the action front-loaded and no filler. The second sentence partly duplicates what the schema already documents, which keeps it off a 5.

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?

All five parameters are optional, so the key question — what happens with no arguments, or with both preset and keypoints — is left to the schema alone. With no annotations and no output schema, the description should say where the overlay lands and what is returned, and it does neither.

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 coverage is 100% and each parameter already has a description covering defaults, enums, and the keypoints-overrides-preset rule. The description restates the preset/category/keypoints distinction but adds no format or constraint detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Add a pose skeleton overlay.' An agent can tell this creates a pose overlay, and the mention of preset/category/keypoints hints at the three input modes. It does not distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as design_add_figure_mannequin or design_set_pose_keypoints, so it stops short of a 5.

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 second sentence tells the agent the three ways to drive the call (preset ID, category name for a random pose, custom keypoints), which is useful mode selection. However, it gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over design_add_figure_mannequin or design_set_pose_keypoints, and no exclusions or prerequisites.

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