add_rectangle

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It details behavior: moves items, recalculates positions, and refuses on duplicates or invalid items. Return value is specified. However, it does not mention potential side effects like moving items affecting other references.

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?

Two sentences efficiently convey core action, two modes, and return value. No wasted words; well-structured for quick comprehension.

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 7 parameters and no output schema, the description covers main scenarios but leaves gaps: path parameter unexplained, format of top/left/width/height not specified. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 coverage is low (14%). The description adds context for contained_items (moving items) and implies positional parameters are string expressions, but does not fully explain each parameter's format or constraints. Partially compensates for missing schema descriptions.

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 adds a Rectangle to Body/ReportItems, distinguishing between empty frame and moving items. It also specifies refusal conditions, making it distinct from sibling tools like add_body_image or add_line.

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 explains what the tool does but lacks explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it or provide comparisons to similar tools.

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