design_create_pastoral

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It never says whether this creates a new sketch or mutates the current one, whether it overwrites existing layers, whether the presets are deterministic from seed, or what the result contains. Listing layer names is content description, not behavioral disclosure.

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 front-loaded sentence with the verb and resource first, then the composition. The comma-separated layer list is slightly long but every element earns its place as a preset hint.

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?

With nine parameters, zero annotations, and no output schema, the definition should say more about the result of the call and its side effects on the document. The composition is clear, but an agent still cannot predict whether a new sketch appears or which layer the presets land on.

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% with all nine parameters documented, so the baseline is 3. The description does add a light mapping between the enumerated scene elements (sky, hills, wheat field, lane, fence, farmhouse, haze) and the corresponding *Preset parameters, which helps an agent know which override to reach for, but seed and atmosphericMode are left unaddressed.

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 ('Create a pastoral countryside scene') and enumerates the exact layer composition, which distinguishes it from generic siblings like design_create_landscape. It does not explicitly contrast with the other named scene presets (design_create_mountain_valley, design_create_park_riverside), but the resource is concrete enough for an agent to differentiate.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of the many alternatives — design_create_landscape, design_create_shan_shui, or the individual design_add_sky / design_add_field / design_add_fence primitives that could build the same scene. The agent must infer that this is a one-shot preset while those siblings are compositional building blocks.

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