create_light_rig

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'create' and lists parameters. It does not explain whether existing lights are replaced or added, if the parent LOP network must already exist, or what side effects occur. This is insufficient for a creation action.

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 compact, front-loaded with the main purpose, and uses a simple Args list without fluff. It could be slightly more structured, but every sentence earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple (3 flat params) and all params are described, but there is no mention of return values or side effects, and no output schema exists to clarify what the agent should expect. Prerequisites and failure behavior are also omitted, leaving moderate gaps.

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%, yet the description fully compensates by defining all three parameters: parent_path, preset with an explicit list of allowed strings, and intensity_mult as a multiplier. This is exactly the information an agent needs to call the tool correctly and goes well beyond the bare parameter names.

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 a specific verb ('create') and resource ('preset lighting rig in a LOP network'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like create_light (single light) and set_light_properties. The preset keyword reinforces that this is a higher-level, packaged operation.

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 choose this tool over alternatives such as create_light or create_lop_node. The 'preset' phrasing implies a convenient higher-level tool, but there is no explicit when/when-not or alternative mention.

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