get_curve_length

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses the unit (internal millimetres), which is valuable, but omits whether this is a read-only query, what happens for non-2D entities, and what the return value looks like.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the unit constraint is placed at the end efficiently. It is appropriately sized for a trivial one-parameter tool, though extremely terse.

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 measurement tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is thin: it does not state the return type/format or how it relates to the near-identical measure_perimeter sibling. An agent lacks enough to confidently call it over alternatives.

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 single entity_id parameter is undocumented in both schema and description. The phrase 'a 2D entity' only hints at what entity_id must reference, adding marginal meaning without explaining accepted identifiers or format.

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 (measure) and resource (length/perimeter of a 2D entity), clearly conveying the operation. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling measure_perimeter, which sounds nearly identical, leaving ambiguity about which tool to pick.

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 guidance on when to use this versus measure_perimeter, measure_distance, or measure_area. The only implied scoping is '2D entity', which is minimal and not framed as a when/when-not condition.

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