creator_add_parameter

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure, but it only states the basic mutation. It does not mention potential side effects, failure conditions (e.g., duplicate names), reversibility, or return values, leaving the agent without critical context.

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, focused sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words. Every word earns its place, making it appropriately sized for the simple operation.

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?

The tool is simple and the schema fully documents parameters, but the description lacks behavioral context, usage guidelines, and any note on side effects or prerequisites. It meets the minimum viability for a basic add operation but has clear gaps in surrounding context.

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 covers 100% of the parameters with descriptions ('name' and 'is_vec2'), so the description does not need to add clarity. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but the high schema coverage warrants a baseline score of 3.

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 target ('a new parameter to the puppet'), which is specific and unambiguous. It distinguishes the tool from sibling operations like set, arm, disarm, and remove by using the verb 'add'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to add a new parameter versus setting an existing one. No conditional context or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name.

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