create_xcos_block_template

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Ask real Xcos to export' hints that an external Xcos process is invoked (implying latency and process spawn), but nothing states side effects, file writes, permission needs, or that the default 120s timeout reflects a slow operation.

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 no filler. It is appropriately terse, though the brevity borders on under-specification for a tool that spawns a process.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but with zero annotation coverage, zero parameter documentation, and an external-process behavior left unstated, the description is too thin for an agent to call this confidently.

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% for two parameters, and the description mentions neither 'name' (is it the block name? the template name?) nor 'timeout_seconds'. It adds no meaning at all beyond the bare schema titles.

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 action (export a one-block diagram) and a concrete output (its XML), which distinguishes it from siblings like list_xcos_blocks or get_xcos_block_source. However, it never reconciles the 'block template' naming with the 'one-block diagram export' phrasing, leaving mild ambiguity about what a template actually is.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus get_xcos_block_source, list_xcos_blocks, or inspect_xcos_model. The agent must infer from context that this generates a template rather than reading an existing block.

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