add_dimension_radial

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses nothing: not whether the dimension is associative, whether it requires an existing circle, whether it mutates the drawing, or what errors occur on failure.

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?

It is a single short sentence with no wasted words, but its brevity comes from under-specification rather than discipline. Short is not the same as concise when nothing informative is conveyed.

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 two-parameter mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter documentation, the description is completely inadequate. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is present.

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 coverage is 0% for both parameters. 'circle_id' and 'value' are undocumented in both schema and description; the agent cannot tell whether circle_id references an entity ID or a named circle, nor whether 'value' is an override or an offset distance.

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 restates the tool name almost verbatim ('Add a dimension_radial constraint'), which is a tautology rather than an explanation of what gets created or where. It gives no hint that this places a radial dimension annotation on a circle entity, and it does nothing to distinguish itself from the sibling 'add_radius_dimension' or 'add_dimension_diameter'.

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?

No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance is provided at all. With three near-synonymous siblings (add_radius_dimension, add_dimension_diameter, add_aligned_dimension) in the tool list, the absence of routing guidance is actively harmful to tool selection.

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