easyar_create_device_build_helper

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

With no annotations, the description should fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the tool creates a script, but omits what happens on overwrite, error cases, or side effects on the project. This is insufficient for a tool that modifies project files.

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?

Single sentence is efficient and front-loaded with key action and target. Could include more structure (e.g., bullet points) but not necessary. Conciseness is good, but lacks depth.

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 no output schema and 5 parameters, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what the generated script does exactly, what files are touched, or prerequisites like Unity installation. Incomplete for a complex tool.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter described. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate. No additional semantic context for parameters like 'developmentBuild' or 'overwrite' behavior.

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 a Unity Editor script for building EasyAR sample scenes, specifying target platforms (Android, iOS, standalone). It distinguishes well from siblings like easyar_create_build_settings_helper or easyar_create_sample_runner.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description does not mention any prerequisites, comparisons, or exclusion conditions, leaving the user uncertain about selection among similar sibling tools.

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