add_gridmap

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses that painted cells are not undoable, which is important. However, it does not explain other behaviors like whether existing cells are cleared on reconfigure or what other side effects occur.

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 sentence that front-loads the core purpose and appends a critical limitation. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 7 parameters, no schema descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It provides a high-level purpose and one warning but leaves many operational details (e.g., parameter meanings, reconfigure behavior) uncovered.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only mentions MeshLibrary and painting cells, which relates to mesh_library_path and cells, but leaves name, position, cell_size, node_path, and parent_path unexplained. This is insufficient compensation for 7 parameters.

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 or reconfigures a GridMap using a MeshLibrary and paints cells. This is a specific verb+resource+action that distinguishes it from sibling tools like tilemap_set_cell or add_mesh_instance.

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 by naming GridMap and MeshLibrary, making it clear this is for GridMap creation/reconfiguration. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this vs alternatives or provide exclusion criteria.

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