voxelforge_build_tree

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden but only mentions adjustable resolution. It does not state side effects, whether the tree is added to an existing scene, or any required permissions. This is insufficient for understanding the tool's 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 extremely concise—two short sentences front-loading the purpose and parameter detail. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted 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?

Given the existence of an output schema, the description need not cover return values. However, it lacks context like whether the tree is placed in the current scene, any size or memory implications, or how resolution affects performance. This is adequate but not thorough.

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 explains the resolution parameter's scale (1=coarse, 2=medium, 4=detailed recommended, 8=very high), adding value beyond the schema. However, the 'name' parameter is not described, leaving a gap.

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 procedural tree with adjustable resolution, using a specific verb ('build') and resource ('procedural tree'). It is concise and unambiguous, leaving no doubt about the tool's core function.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'voxelforge_build_chibi_bear'. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use it, leaving the agent without context for tool selection.

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