add_blendspace_sample

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Add', implying a write operation, but gives no details on side effects, overwriting behavior, coordinate ranges, or whether the BlendSpace must already exist.

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 text is short and front-loaded with the purpose, but the Args block is redundant with the input schema and doesn't add meaningful detail. It is not bloated, but every line in the Args section is already covered by the schema.

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?

The tool has an output schema, but the description does not mention what the tool returns. For a tool with four required parameters and no annotations, more context is needed (e.g., return value, error conditions, coordinate system). The description leaves the agent to infer too much.

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 description lists the four arguments with brief labels (asset_path, anim_path, x, y) but these simply mirror the input schema property names/titles and add no extra semantic meaning. Since schema_description_coverage is 0%, the description fails to compensate by explaining what x/y represent, valid ranges, or any format expectations.

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 ('Add a sample to a BlendSpace') with a specific verb and resource. The verb 'add' differentiates it from sibling tools like 'edit_blendspace_sample' and 'delete_blendspace_sample', though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 available alternatives (e.g., get_blendspace_samples, edit_blendspace_sample). Prerequisites such as the BlendSpace existing or coordinate constraints are not mentioned.

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