Create Shape

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

Annotations only include openWorldHint: true, which indicates side effects, but the description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond creation. No mention of destructive actions, permissions, or side effects like node creation. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the fact that it creates shapes.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the key purpose and parameters. Every sentence adds value without repetition or filler.

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 output schema exists (as indicated), the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the main functionality and parameter validation. However, it could briefly mention that the tool creates a node in the document or returns an ID, but the output schema likely covers that.

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 100%, so parameters are described individually. The description adds value by clarifying validation rules for shape-specific parameters (arcData, pointCount, innerRadius) and noting that pointCount is native with no even-parity rule, which goes beyond schema descriptions.

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 verb 'create' and lists specific shape types (rectangle, ellipse, polygon, star) via the `type` parameter, distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_frame and create_svg. It also mentions position/size and optional color parameters.

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?

The description implies usage for creating basic shapes but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives like create_svg or create_connection. It lacks exclusions or context for choosing this tool over siblings.

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