Token Add

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

没有注释，描述必须完全承担行为披露责任。描述只说了DM only，未说明添加token的行为（如是否覆盖、图层默认值、可见性处理等），信息严重不足。

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?

描述非常简短，无冗余内容，结构上也无问题。但考虑到工具复杂度（10个参数），这种简洁更像信息不足而非精心组织，未能承担应有的信息传递作用。

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?

工具具有10个参数、5个必填项和众多兄弟工具，描述仅一句话，远远不足以让代理正确调用。没有说明参数如何组合、与兄弟工具的关系，也没有提供任何操作上下文。

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?

输入模式覆盖率为0%，所有参数均无描述。描述中也没有解释任何参数的含义或关联，代理无法从描述中理解map_id、x、y、image_url等参数的作用。描述完全没有补偿模式信息的缺失。

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?

描述'放 token 到地图（DM only）'明确了具体动作（放）和资源（token、地图），能初步传达工具功能。但与兄弟工具如token_move、token_place_creature相比，未说明区分点，容易造成混淆。

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?

描述仅提及'DM only'权限限制，没有提供任何关于何时使用此工具与替代工具（如token_move、token_place_creature）的指导。没有when/when-not说明，代理无法判断该工具适用场景。

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