Apply a GLSL shader from the vault

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint: false, destructiveHint: false), the description clarifies that the side effect is node creation in TD, not file writes, and that it returns the created GLSL TOP. It also notes the vault path requirement, adding useful behavioral context.

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, front-loaded with the primary action, and each sentence adds value—covering source, side effect, alternative, return value, and prerequisite. No filler or repetition.

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?

With annotations, full schema coverage, and a description that includes the side effect, return value, and alternative tool, the description is complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. No output schema exists, but the description states what is returned.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds context about the shader note format but does not add significant new meaning to the individual parameters beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., note as path or name).

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 tool's action: read a shader note from the Obsidian vault and create a GLSL TOP in TouchDesigner. It specifically names the vault as the source and distinguishes itself from create_glsl_shader, which supplies inline code.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'Use this to apply a shader you keep in the vault; to supply shader code inline instead, use create_glsl_shader.' Also mentions the side effect (node creation) and the prerequisite (configured TDMCP_VAULT_PATH).

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