instantiate_template_assets

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

The description discloses the core behavior beyond the annotations: it creates entity hierarchies in the scene and returns the created entity summaries. It also states the template-only restriction. Annotations already mark the operation as non-read-only and non-idempotent, so the description adds meaningful behavioral context without contradicting them.

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?

Two tightly packed sentences: the first states the operation, effect, and return value; the second gives explicit exclusions and the alternative. No filler, and the key constraint is presented clearly.

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 tool with three params, one required, and schema fully documenting them, the description is complete. It states the output, the input restriction, and the alternative for a different use case. An agent has enough context to select and invoke it correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, with all three parameters already documented in the input schema. The tool description doesn't add parameter-specific detail, but it doesn't need to because the schema carries that weight. Repeating parameter meaning would be redundant.

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 a specific verb ('Instantiate') and resource ('template assets') plus the outcome ('creating entity hierarchies from them') and return value. It also explicitly contrasts itself with create_entities, making its purpose unmistakable even among many sibling tools.

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 explicitly says when NOT to use the tool: for non-template assets, since only type="template" assets can be instantiated, and for building an entity from scratch, where create_entities is the alternative. This gives clear decision criteria for an agent.

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