Read the figure

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

With only readOnlyHint=true provided, the description usefully adds the return contract (the exact fields listed) and defines the semantics of dependsOn/usedBy, including the destructive implication of usedBy ('objects that would change or be deleted with it'). It does not mention pagination, cost, or size limits on a potentially large figure.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the output inventory, followed by the actionable directive to call it before fixing. No filler or restatement of the title.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by enumerating every returned field and explaining dependsOn/usedBy. Safety is covered by the readOnly annotation, and the usage trigger is stated, leaving nothing critical missing.

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 100%, so both parameters (names, include_hidden) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no additional constraint or format guidance for them, so the baseline 3 applies.

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+resource ('List the objects currently in the figure') and then enumerates exactly what each entry contains (name, type, definition, value, coordinates, visibility, dependsOn, usedBy). This distinguishes it from screenshot/evaluate siblings without needing to name them.

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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use rule: 'Always call this before fixing a figure: the user may have edited it by hand.' That's a clear context trigger. It does not name alternative tools or when-not-to-use, so it falls short of a 5.

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