create_light

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It states it creates a light but doesn't disclose side effects, permissions, failure behavior, or whether it modifies existing lights. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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?

Concise, front-loaded with purpose, and efficiently lists parameters without fluff. The format is clean 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?

Incomplete for a creation tool with 6 parameters: no mention of return value, prerequisites (like LOP network existence), edge cases, or assumptions. Assumes familiarity with USD/LOP concepts and doesn't explain optionality.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It lists all parameters with brief descriptions (e.g., light_type options), adding meaning beyond the schema. However, lacks ranges/units for intensity, color, and position, and doesn't indicate defaults, so compensation is partial.

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 (create) and resource (USD light in LOP network), clearly distinguishing from list_lights and set_light_properties. The verb+resource is precise and unambiguous.

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 vs. alternatives like create_light_rig or set_light_properties. The description is silent on selection criteria, prerequisites, 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.