Apply Xpresso Graph Description

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It explains that the tool creates nodes and wires connections in one call, accepts operator_id as int or alias, and optionally creates a Texpresso tag. It could further detail side effects or error handling, but current coverage is good.

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 at 4-5 sentences, front-loaded with the core concept and key differentiators. Every sentence adds meaningful information without redundancy or filler.

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 complexity of nested objects and absence of an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, and an example. It does not mention return values or error states, which are minor gaps, but overall it is adequately complete for a builder tool.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters, so the description already adds value by listing operator_id aliases and providing an example usage. This goes beyond the schema's self-documentation, aiding the agent in constructing valid input.

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 it is a 'declarative builder for an Xpresso graph' and explicitly distinguishes it from 'apply_graph_description' for Maxon node materials. It uses specific verbs like 'creates nodes' and 'wires connections', making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides clear context by comparing to sibling tool 'apply_graph_description' (for Maxon) and mentions when to create a tag if missing. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives for similar tasks.

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