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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It only states 'select' without describing effects like highlighting, persisting selection state, or whether it modifies the structure. This is minimal disclosure.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences plus an example and alias list. Every element adds value, and the aliases save user time.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description fails to contextualize selection among many sibling tools (e.g., how it differs from 'select_near'). It doesn't clarify what 'select' means operationally (e.g., highlighting vs. temporary marking).

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 0%, so description must compensate. It explains that 'spec' is a 'ChimeraX specifier string' and gives an example, adding context beyond the raw schema. However, it lacks a full explanation of the specifier syntax.

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 'Select' and the resource 'atoms/residues' using a 'ChimeraX specifier string', with an example and aliases. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'mutate_residue' or 'delete_atoms'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'select_near', 'select_chain', or 'invert_selection'. The example provides a usage hint but no explicit when/when-not rules.

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