drawing_space

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that p1/p2/p3 require `vanishing_points` and explains what each view mode produces, but says nothing about whether switching space resets or preserves existing strokes, whether it is persistent, or what the call returns.

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?

A single dense sentence, but it is front-loaded with the primary resource and the enum glossary is parenthetically structured. No filler sentences, though the run-on form makes it slightly heavy to parse.

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?

For a 7-parameter mode-configuration tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers parameter meanings well but omits state effects (does it clear the canvas?) and any precondition such as an open board, which an agent needs before invoking it.

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 only 14%, so the description must compensate, and it largely does: it explains all eight space modes, clarifies that `grid` is grid size, and covers lightbox, snapping, and dimension units. Only `units_per_px` is left to the schema, which already 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Set the drawing space and guides') and then defines every enum value of `space`, including the orthographic pane layout for v3/v4. It does not contrast itself with siblings like `layers` or `board`, so an agent must infer the boundary.

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?

Usage is only implied: you call it when you want to change drawing mode or units. There is no explicit when/when-not guidance, no mention of whether a board must be open first, and no alternatives named.

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