place_component

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the action but fails to disclose important behaviors such as what happens if the component name is not found, whether the operation is reversible, or any side effects on the model.

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?

A single sentence of 15 words that efficiently communicates the main purpose. No unnecessary words, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 lack of output schema, annotations, and limited parameter descriptions, the description is insufficient. It does not address return values, error conditions, prerequisites (component must exist), or default behavior (e.g., orientation, scaling).

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?

The schema covers 50% of parameters with descriptions (name has a description, origin does not). The description adds 'given origin' but does not clarify the coordinate system or expected format beyond the schema's minItems/maxItems. Partial compensation for missing schema description.

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 uses a specific verb ('place') and identifies the resource ('instance of an existing component definition') and context ('into the model at a given origin'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like create_component (which creates definitions) and list_components (which lists 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?

The description implies the tool is for placing an instance of an existing component, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., when to create a component first). No when-not or exclusion criteria are provided.

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