create_grid_map

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 disclosing behavioral traits. It does not mention that creating a GridMap likely modifies the current scene, requires an open scene, or returns any value. The description is silent on side effects and prerequisites.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It conveys the core purpose 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?

With three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal to be complete. It does not explain what scene_path means, what parent defaults to, or what happens after creation. An agent would struggle to invoke this correctly without additional 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 0% and the tool description does not explain any of the three parameters. The parameter names (name, parent, scene_path) are not self-explanatory—especially scene_path, which could refer to a scene file, a mesh library, or a node path. The description adds no value over the bare 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 tool's function with a specific verb ('Create'), a specific resource ('GridMap node'), and its purpose ('3D tile-based level design'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_scene or create_mesh_primitive.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_scene or read_grid_map. It only mentions a general purpose without exclusions or alternative references.

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