Add a shape

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

Clearly indicates the tool mutates the document by adding a shape and reports the new id. It also explains defaults for page/document/master behavior beyond the minimal annotations.

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 reasonably concise but contains slight redundancy between the first sentence and the Args list, and a minor typo ('drop' instead of 'use').

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?

Includes return behavior, related tool reference, and defaults. With an output schema present, it need not elaborate further; the description gives enough context for successful invocation.

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?

With no schema-level descriptions, the text explains all 10 parameters, including units, defaults, and optional behavior (e.g., page/document omission, width/height defaults, primitive options).

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 ('Add a shape to a page') and the return value ('return its new id'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that render, query, or modify shapes.

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?

Provides practical guidance on preferring masters and consulting visio_list_masters, plus behavior when no master is used. It does not explicitly contrast with every alternative, but the usage context is clear.

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