create_polygon

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states the basic operation without disclosing side effects, permissions, error handling (e.g., if pageIndex is invalid), or that it modifies the document. This is insufficient given the lack of annotations.

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 short sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the action and key location detail. However, it is extremely concise and might be too terse for a tool with 9 parameters.

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 has 9 parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief to provide a complete context. It does not explain typical usage, coordinate system, or behavior when parameters like fillColor or strokeWidth are omitted. The schema covers parameter types but the description lacks operational context.

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 100%, so the description does not need to repeat parameter meanings. The description adds minimal value by mentioning the default page behavior for pageIndex, but otherwise does not enhance parameter understanding beyond the schema.

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 action 'Create a polygon' and specifies the location 'on the specified page', with a default to the active page. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_rectangle or create_ellipse by explicitly naming 'polygon' and mentioning InDesign UI, which is unique among shape creation tools.

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 for creating polygons, but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it compare with alternatives like create_rectangle. The mention of default page is helpful but limited.

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