create_xr_rig

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

The description accurately indicates the tool creates a new GameObject (write operation) without contradicting the readOnlyHint=false annotation. It specifies the components set up, but could add more detail about scene impact (e.g., 'adds to current scene'). No contradiction found.

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 concise with two sentences covering the core action and key setup details. It front-loads the purpose but could improve by listing configurable aspects more explicitly.

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 tool's complexity (11 parameters, nested objects) and absence of an output schema, the description adequately summarizes the creation scope. However, it omits what the tool returns (e.g., the GameObject) and scene-level implications.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add extra semantic meaning beyond the schema; it only provides a high-level overview without parameter-specific detail.

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 explicitly states the tool creates an XR Origin configured for XREAL One Pro, naming specific components (HMD camera, hand tracking origins, interaction components). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_scene or create_prefab.

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like setup_xreal_project or create_xr_ui. While the purpose is clear, no usage context or exclusions are provided.

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