cst_create_temperature_dependent_material

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states the tool creates a material but does not disclose details about validation, side effects, or default behaviors beyond what the parameters imply. It adds moderate context.

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 concise sentences. The first sentence states the primary purpose, and the second tells what to specify. No extraneous information, well-front-loaded.

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?

Given the detailed input schema and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and key usage. It could mention that it creates a new material object or the reference temperature, but overall it is complete for its complexity.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description only says 'Specify base properties and temperature coefficients', which adds little beyond the parameter descriptions in the schema. No additional semantic value.

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?

The description clearly states the tool creates a material with temperature-dependent electromagnetic properties, specifying base properties and temperature coefficients. It distinguishes this from sibling material creation tools by focusing on temperature dependence and thermal-electromagnetic co-simulation.

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 description indicates usage for thermal-electromagnetic co-simulation and specifying base properties and coefficients. It implies when to use this tool versus generic material creation tools but does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use it.

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