design_analyze_phyllotaxis

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full load. It discloses the computed outputs (spiral families, divergence angle, packing efficiency), which is useful since there is no output schema, but it never states whether the operation is read-only, whether it mutates the sketch, or what form the results take.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the action and immediately enumerates what is computed. No filler and no redundancy.

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 three parameters are optional and fully documented, and the description usefully lists the metrics returned in lieu of an output schema. What remains missing is whether any prior phyllotaxis setup is required and whether the call has side effects.

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 is documented, including the 'overrides preset' relationship and the golden-angle default. The description's 'preset or custom config' phrasing restates that split without adding format or precedence detail beyond the schema, so baseline 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?

Names a specific verb ('analyze') and resource ('phyllotaxis patterns'), and enumerates the computed quantities (parastichy numbers, divergence angle, packing efficiency). No sibling offers phyllotaxis analysis, so the name plus this description separates it cleanly, though the text does not explicitly call out that distinction.

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 'for a preset or custom config' hints that either a preset ID or custom parameters may be supplied, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g., must a phyllotaxis preset already exist), and no mention of related tools like design_grow_plant or design_create_inflorescence.

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