create_light

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether it replaces existing lights at same path), mutability, or system behavior. Only lists params but no behavioral context.

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?

Description is short and to the point, listing args in a clean format. Could be slightly more concise by removing 'Args:' header, but it's well-structured.

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?

Adequate for a simple creation tool with output schema. Missing context about uniqueness constraints (prim_path), range limits for intensity/color, and error scenarios. Not critical but could be improved.

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 6 parameters are briefly described with format hints (e.g., '[x, y, z]', '0-1', 'degrees', 'Auto-generated'). This adds meaning beyond the schema, which has 0% description coverage and only defaults.

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 it creates a light, with specific verb 'Create' and resource 'light'. It distinguishes from sibling 'modify_light' by implying creation vs modification.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like modify_light or other siblings. Only implicit that it's for creating new lights, but no when-not or prerequisites.

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