draw_polygon

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the tool draws a polygon, but does not disclose side effects like requiring an active sketch, overwriting existing entities, or whether it modifies the sketch in place. The parameter description for rotation gives some behavioral hint, but the tool description itself contributes nothing beyond that.

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 a single sentence that succinctly conveys the tool's purpose. No extraneous information is included, and it is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 that the tool has 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what happens when sketch_index is omitted, how rotation uses the default, or any error scenarios. A more complete description would clarify these points.

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?

All parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. It does not explain relationships or provide usage context for the parameters.

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 draws a regular polygon with 3-12 sides on a sketch. It uses a specific verb and resource, but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like draw_rectangle (which draws a 4-sided polygon) or draw_circle (infinite sides).

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as draw_rectangle or draw_circle. The description only states what the tool does, not when it should be chosen.

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