visual_add

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'add a visual from a reusable template and bind fields or measures,' with no mention of side effects (e.g., whether it overwrites existing visuals), permissions, error conditions, or the meaning of 'reusable template.' Minimal transparency.

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 very short (one sentence), which is concise but at the expense of necessary detail. It could be more informative without being verbose.

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 complexity of the tool (10 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain binding structure, template usage, or error handling. The agent lacks sufficient context to use the tool correctly.

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 adds no meaning for the 10 parameters, including nested objects like 'position' and 'bindings.' The agent cannot understand what parameters like 'filters', 'format', or 'dryRun' do from the description alone.

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 states 'Add a visual from a reusable template and bind fields or measures,' which gives a basic action but does not explain what a 'reusable template' is. It does not differentiate from sibling tool 'visual_bind_fields', which might be used for binding separately. The purpose is somewhat clear but lacks precision.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like visual_bind_fields or visual_update. No prerequisites or context for using the template. The description does not help the agent decide when this tool is appropriate.

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