コイン生成

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

The description discloses the return value ({entityId, name, sceneGeneration}) and implies it's a creation action. Annotations only include title and openWorldHint=false, so no contradiction. The description adequately covers behavioral traits without misleading.

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, well-structured sentence that includes all key information: purpose, visual details, use case, optional parameters, and return value. No 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 spawn tool with two optional parameters and an output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, what it returns, and how to use it. No gaps.

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?

Both parameters (name and position) are well-documented in the input schema with descriptions. The description adds marginal value by restating that they are optional and specifying defaults ('Coin' and [0,0,0]), but these are already in the schema. With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 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 it creates a coin-like collectible item in one call, with specific visual details (golden thin disc-shaped sphere, tag 'coin', metallic luster). It distinguishes from sibling spawn tools like spawn_box, spawn_sphere, and spawn_model by focusing on coin-specific attributes and use case in platform games.

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 context for usage in platform games for placing collectibles. It notes that rotation and score addition require separate Lua/trigger handling, hinting at limitations. While not explicit about alternatives, the sibling list offers other spawn tools for different shapes.

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