td_ensure_cook

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention side effects, reversibility, or performance implications of installing the force-cook. The tool clearly mutates node state, but the description only states the action and purpose without explaining the consequences.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action, and contains zero unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise and well-structured for the tool's simplicity.

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 one parameter and an output schema, so return values are covered. The description explains the action and purpose, but lacks information about side effects or prerequisites. For a mutation tool with no annotations, 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?

The schema has a single 'path' parameter with no description. The description adds that the tool operates 'on a node', implying that 'path' refers to a node path. This provides essential meaning but does not specify format, constraints, or examples.

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 installs a per-frame force-cook on a node, with the specific purpose of fixing GLSL/feedback freeze. It uses a specific verb ('Install') and resource ('node'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like td_get or td_set.

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 parenthetical '(fixes GLSL/feedback freeze)' provides a clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it stops short of a full 5.

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