create_summit_kold_deposit_v1

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states the result (a deposit with motes), omitting side effects like clearing existing deposits (implied by the 'clear_existing' parameter), permission needs, or any destructive behavior. The agent cannot anticipate the tool's full impact.

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 very concise (12 words) but lacks structure and depth. It front-loads the main purpose but omits critical details. While brevity is valued, here it sacrifices necessary information, making it insufficient for correct tool invocation.

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?

Given the tool's creation role among many siblings and the presence of a single boolean parameter with no schema description, the description is not complete. It does not cover the parameter's effect, return values, or any constraints, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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 has one parameter 'clear_existing' with no description, and the tool description does not mention it at all. Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description fails to compensate by explaining the parameter's meaning or default behavior, leaving the agent to guess.

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 builds a 'Kold deposit V1' characterized by 'low gold motes scattered on the ground,' which distinguishes it from sibling creation tools that build other objects like bobcats or drones. The verb 'Build' aligns with the action, and the resource is uniquely identified.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or why one would choose this tool over other creation tools. The agent receives no help in deciding whether this tool is appropriate.

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