Connect people-counting bus

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

Annotations already indicate mutability (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive nature (destructiveHint=false). The description adds scaffold content context but does not disclose side effects like where the scaffold is created, whether it modifies the active project, or what the 'scaffold' implies operationally in TouchDesigner.

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 one concise, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action and result. It contains no filler and effectively conveys the primary purpose.

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?

For a 9-parameter creation tool with no output schema, the description leaves significant gaps: it doesn't specify return value, where the scaffold is created, or its effect in the TouchDesigner environment. It also doesn't clarify what 'scaffold' entails beyond listing component categories.

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 (22%), so the description must compensate. It maps key concepts (zone counts, sample windows, adapter source, privacy) to several parameters, but it doesn't explain parameters like active, venue_label, or parent_path beyond schema defaults, nor does it clarify constraints like zone_count max 128.

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 creates a people-counting scaffold with specific components (zone counts, sample windows, adapter source, privacy notes), distinguishing it from other bus/connect tools. However, the verb 'Create' mismatches the tool name 'connect', introducing slight ambiguity about whether it connects an existing bus or creates a new one.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternative connectivity/scaffolding tools. It only states what it creates, with no context about prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions.

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