sw_active_document_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Return information' implies a read-only operation, but it does not disclose failure behavior when no active document exists, whether it can throw an error, or what exact information is included. The lack of detail leaves important behavioral questions unanswered.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action and target with no wasted words. It is concise while still being informative enough for a simple zero-parameter tool.

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 low complexity, zero parameters, and presence of an output schema, the description is mostly complete for an information-retrieval tool. It does not explain what happens when no active document is open, but the output schema likely covers return values, and this gap is minor for a simple getter.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so the description has no parameter meaning to add. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description does not need to compensate for any missing parameter documentation.

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 a verb ('Return') and a resource ('information about the active SolidWorks document'). It is distinct from sibling tools like sw_export_active and sw_review_active, though the term 'information' remains somewhat generic without specifying which properties are returned.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites such as requiring an open document. Usage must be inferred from the tool name and generic description.

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