create_circle

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only discloses the action 'create' and does not mention side effects (e.g., adding a shape to the specified page), required permissions, or return behavior. It also fails to note that fileId and pageId are required to place the circle, which is important operational 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?

The description is a single, concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Create a circle shape') before listing the styling options. Every word earns its place, and it avoids any fluff or repetition.

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 33 parameters and no output schema, but the description provides only a broad feature list. It does not mention that the circle is created on a specific page (implied by required fileId/pageId), does not describe the return value, and does not explain conditional parameter usage (e.g., choosing gradientStops over a solid fillColor). The schema is comprehensive, but the description lacks the operational context an agent needs to correctly invoke this tool.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a high-level categorization of parameters (colors, gradients, images, etc.) but does not add syntax, formatting details, or relationships between parameters beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., how fillImageId and fillImageName interact).

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 specific verb 'Create' and the resource 'circle shape', and lists the styling capabilities (colors, gradients, images, borders, shadows, blur, blend modes). This unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling creation tools like create_rectangle, create_text, and create_frame.

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 implies the tool is for creating circle shapes, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives such as create_rectangle, nor does it mention any prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is preferred. The context is clear but lacks explicit exclusions or alternative guidance.

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