create_armature

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the creation of an armature with a bone but omits critical behavior like whether null location uses origin or 3D cursor, whether the new armature becomes the active object, or any scene context requirements. This is insufficient for a creation tool with no 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. 'Create an armature' is concise, and 'with an initial bone' adds necessary qualifier. This is appropriately compact for such a simple operation.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity and presence of an output schema, the description omits essential context for correct invocation, particularly the interpretation of location (null vs. array) and the behavior of the initial bone. The lack of annotations and parameter descriptions makes this description incomplete for an agent to use effectively.

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 0%, and the description does not mention the 'name' or 'location' parameters at all. It provides no semantic meaning for location (e.g., world coordinates) or the effect of a null default. The description completely fails to compensate for the schema's lack of parameter documentation.

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 verb 'create' and the resource 'armature', with the qualifier 'with an initial bone' distinguishing it from generic object creation tools like create_object and bone-manipulation tools like add_bone. This unambiguously conveys the tool's specific function.

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 usage when an armature is needed but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., creating an empty object then adding bones). No exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned, so it relies on implied context.

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