Create Sprite Node

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It outlines key steps (ensure node, attach, resolve, assign, save) but omits behavior on conflicts (e.g., node already exists), error handling, or side effects. The description is adequate but lacks depth.

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 single-sentence description is concise and front-loaded with key actions. It efficiently communicates the main purpose, though it could be slightly expanded for clarity on optional steps. No wasted words.

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 8 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It fails to explain parameters like port, timeout, openSceneDelayMs, or what happens on success. The tool's complexity demands more detail.

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 low (~25%). The description adds meaning to 'sprite.assetPath' by specifying it resolves a SpriteFrame. However, other parameters (e.g., port, timeout, saveScene) lack explanation. The description only partially compensates for low coverage.

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/ensure' and the resource 'sprite node', detailing multiple steps: ensure node exists, attach Sprite component, resolve asset, assign, optionally save. It distinguishes from siblings like 'cocos_local_assign_sprite_frame' which presumably only assigns.

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 the tool is for creating a sprite node within a scene but provides no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives (e.g., 'cocos_local_place_sprite_assets') or when not to use. No exclusions or conditions are stated.

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