add_modifier

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral details such as in-place modification of the object's modifier stack, error handling, or whether the modifier is added with default properties. For a mutating tool, this leaves the agent without essential safety and side-effect information.

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?

Two concise sentences, with the primary action front-loaded and a valuable enumeration of type examples. There is zero wasted verbiage.

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 description covers the core action and type values, but omits usage guidance relative to sibling modifier tools and behavioral context for a mutating operation. The presence of an output schema mitigates the need to describe return values, yet the description remains only moderately complete for an agent to confidently invoke it.

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 has no property descriptions (0% coverage), so the description carries the burden. It compensates partially by listing common values for the 'type' parameter, but does not clarify the meaning of 'name' (optional, default null) or 'object'. Thus, it only partially fills the gap.

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 clearly states the action 'Add' and the resource 'modifier to an object', and provides a useful list of common modifier types. This sharply distinguishes it from sibling tools like remove_modifier or set_modifier_property.

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 when to use the tool (when you want to add a modifier) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusionary cases. It could be improved by noting that modifying existing modifiers is handled by set_modifier_property or similar tools.

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