cubism_edit

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses automatic handling of EditBegin/EditEnd, which is useful transactional behavior. However, it does not mention other traits such as effects on model state, error conditions, or required permissions. Adequate but minimal.

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 concise: two sentences plus a structured Args list. No filler or redundancy, every sentence is meaningful.

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 presence of an output schema (not needed to describe), the tool is fairly complete. It explains the purpose, transaction handling, and parameter semantics. Could mention the implicit current document context, but overall adequate for a simple edit tool.

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 the description adds significant meaning: action is an API name with examples, and params is an object that automatically receives ModelUID. This helps the agent understand parameter usage beyond the schema's bare types.

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 states 'execute edit operation' and automatically handles EditBegin/EditEnd, which indicates a single edit operation. Combined with the action enum listing specific APIs like AddParameter, EditPart, etc., the verb and resource are clear. However, the description alone is slightly generic and could be more specific, hence a 4.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like cubism_edit_batch or other sibling tools. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent without clear selection criteria.

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