create_demo_rig

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the output (rig files to disk) and that it's a template editable later. However, it omits details like overwrite behavior, required permissions, or side effects, which are important for a file-writing operation.

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?

Description is short, front-loaded with the main action, and uses a structured Args section. It is efficient but could be slightly more polished (e.g., removing redundancy).

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, composition, and usage context. It provides enough detail for the agent to understand the tool's role without being overly verbose.

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 only parameter 'out_dir' is explained as 'folder to save rig', which adds meaningful context beyond the schema's 'Out Dir' label. With low schema coverage (0%), the description adequately compensates by clarifying the parameter's role.

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?

Description clearly states the tool saves a built-in biped character rig to disk, specifying the resource (built-in rig with parts, skeleton, clips) and action (save). It distinguishes from siblings like export_rig_kit by framing it as a starting template, which no other sibling does.

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?

Description indicates it's a starting template for user rig authoring and demos, implying use for initial setup. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., assembling an animation or exporting a custom rig) or provide exclusions.

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