array_objects

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

With destructiveHint=true, the description is expected to clarify mutating behavior. 'Array-clone' implies creating copies rather than moving, but it does not state whether originals are preserved, how selection changes, or other side effects. The annotation already warns about destructiveness, so the description is not misleading, but it adds limited behavioral depth.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The bilingual duplication is redundant but compact and useful, and the mode-specific parameter mapping is organized efficiently.

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 schema covers every parameter and default, so basic calls are feasible. Yet the description leaves ambiguities such as whether count includes the original object, what spacing measures, and how center factors into radial arrays—important details for a destructive operation with no output schema.

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?

All 11 parameters already have schema descriptions, so the baseline is met. The description adds a valuable mode-to-parameter mapping and names the core parameters for each mode; it omits center from that mapping, but the schema documents it.

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 opens with 'Array-clone objects' and immediately scopes the tool to 1D/2D/3D grids or radial distributions. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling duplication/scatter/transform tools even without naming them.

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 useful within-tool guidance by pairing each mode with its relevant parameters ('grid uses count1/2/3 + spacing1/2/3; radial uses count1, axis, radius'). However, it never explicitly says when to prefer this over clone_objects or scatter_objects, and gives no 'do not use' conditions.

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