add_node

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'add a node,' implying a write operation, but fails to mention whether the scene file is saved, whether the action is reversible, or how invalid paths are handled. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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, direct sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action and resource, making it easy to scan and comprehend instantly.

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 write operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It omits critical operational details such as return values, side effects on the scene, and any prerequisites. While the schema covers parameter meanings, the description does not convey the overall behavior needed for confident invocation.

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?

The input schema already provides descriptions for all six parameters (nodeName, nodeType, scenePath, parentNodePath, properties, projectPath), so schema coverage is 100%. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already states, making this a baseline score.

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 action ('Add') and the resource ('node'), scoping it to an existing scene, which differentiates it from scene creation or removal tools. While it doesn't elaborate on node types or scene structure, the core purpose is unambiguous.

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 like create_scene, remove_node, or set_node_property. There are no prerequisites, such as needing to open the scene first, nor any exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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