create_sphere

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral transparency. It adds 'at origin' as a positional constraint, which is useful, but it does not disclose side effects such as whether the sphere is added to the current study, or any validation or return behavior. This is minimal but not misleading.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the essential action and location, making it highly readable and scannable.

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?

For a simple creation tool with only two parameters and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers purpose and placement, but lacks usage guidance and parameter context. The existence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values, so a 3 is appropriate.

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 0%, and the description does not mention the 'radius' or 'name' parameters at all. The agent must rely solely on the schema titles, which lack units, constraints, or any additional meaning. The description provides no compensation for the missing parameter descriptions.

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?

Clearly identifies the action (create), the resource (GEOM sphere), and the placement (at origin). This distinguishes it from sibling shape-creation tools like create_box and create_cylinder, which target different shapes.

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?

Usage is implied by the tool name and description: use when a sphere is needed. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives like create_box or create_cylinder, nor any prerequisites or exclusions.

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