build_open_schematic

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 only restates the build action and does not disclose side effects, destructive impact, permissions, prerequisites, or whether the operation consumes resources.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. Every word contributes to identifying the action and its target.

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 output schema exists, so return values do not need explanation, and the zero-parameter schema is fully documented. However, for an unannotated build/mutation tool, the description leaves significant behavioral gaps, including how it relates to the sibling build_schematic.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter semantics for the description to add. Baseline 4 is appropriate because the empty schema fully defines the invocation.

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 verb (Build) and resource (the schematic currently open in Schematica), so the agent knows the core action. It does not, however, distinguish this from the sibling build_schematic tool or clarify the relationship between an 'open' schematic and other schematic-building operations.

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?

Usage is implied by 'currently open in Schematica' – the tool applies when a schematic is open. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use condition, and no named alternative such as build_schematic.

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