create_spare_parameter

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies mutation via 'Add' but says nothing about permissions, whether the parameter persists, what happens on a duplicate parm_name, or what is returned — significant gaps for a write operation.

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?

Front-loaded purpose sentence followed by a compact per-argument list; no filler or repetition. Slightly terse, but every line 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?

For a 7-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the argument documentation is solid but the behavioral story is incomplete — no success/failure semantics, no note on whether the node must already exist or be unlocked, and no return-value indication.

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%, so the description must compensate, and it largely does: it names all seven parameters and adds real meaning, notably the allowed parm_type values ('float', 'int', 'string', 'toggle', 'menu') which the schema does not enumerate as an enum, and the float/int-only constraint on min_val/max_val.

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 first line states a specific verb and resource ('Add a spare parameter to a node'), which is clear enough to act on. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the near-identical sibling 'create_spare_parameters' (plural), leaving the agent to guess which one to pick.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. node must exist, name collisions), and critically no differentiation from the sibling 'create_spare_parameters'. The agent gets no help choosing between the singular and plural variants.

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