Create an as-built joint between two components to keep them fixed in their current positions without moving.
Create an as-built joint (keeps both components in their current place).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| component_one | Yes | ||
| component_two | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.6.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations indicate mutation and non-destructive behavior. Description adds the key trait of keeping components in place but lacks details on permissions, reversibility, or consequences.
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?
One sentence front-loads the core purpose. Efficient but could benefit from structured presentation for multiple aspects.
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 the simple tool with 2 string params and no output schema, the description covers the main action but omits prerequisites and potential side effects.
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%, but description provides no additional meaning for component_one and component_two beyond their names. Full burden on description to explain parameters, which it fails to do.
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 creates an as-built joint that keeps both components in place, distinguishing it from a regular joint which typically moves components to align.
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 versus alternatives like fusion_joint. The description implies context but gives no exclusions or explicit when-to-use instructions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.