apply_particle_preset

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the tool sets node parameters and creates a fresh material, and that it sizes the preset based on the node's dimension. This gives useful behavioral context, though it does not detail whether existing materials are overwritten or describe potential side effects.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the action, scope, and key behavior without unnecessary words.

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 simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides sufficient context for selecting and invoking it: what it does, what it affects, and how it adapts to node dimension. However, it lacks details on return values or error conditions, which could be inferred from sibling tools.

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 for parameter meaning. It mentions 'preset' and 'node' but does not specify valid preset values or explain node_path beyond the implied 'node's dimension.' The scheme's enum for preset provides some structure, but the description adds little beyond that.

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 applies a tuned particle preset, combining node parameters and a fresh material, sized for the node's 2D or 3D dimension. This specific verb-resource pairing distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_particles or set_particle_material, which handle individual aspects of particle setup.

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 when a complete preset effect is desired, but it does not explicitly mention when to choose this over granular alternatives like set_particle_material or set_particle_color_gradient. There is no explicit 'use this instead of X' guidance, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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