add_continued_dimension

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It says nothing about side effects, permissions, whether it modifies the drawing, what happens on invalid points, or what is returned. It is merely a restatement of the tool name.

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 short sentence and is front-loaded, but it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise. It omits essential information that an agent would need to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

Given the complexity of the CAD dimensioning domain, the presence of many sibling dimension tools, no annotations, no output schema, and zero schema description coverage, the description is not complete enough for correct tool selection or invocation.

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 description adds no meaning for the single required parameter 'points'. It does not explain units, coordinate order, coordinate space, why a minimum of two points is required, or how those points define a continued dimension.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Add continued dimensions'), so the general operation is clear. However, it does not explain what a 'continued dimension' is or how it differs from sibling dimension tools such as add_baseline_dimension, add_linear_dimension, or add_aligned_dimension. The resource term is therefore ambiguous in context.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool, when not to use it, or which sibling dimension tool is the alternative. With many dimension-related siblings, the absence of routing guidance is a severe gap.

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