sw_create_flange

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

With no annotations present, the description must carry behavioral disclosure, but it only states that a parametric flange is created. It does not explain what document or context is affected, whether existing files are overwritten, whether the part is saved, how SolidWorks state changes, or any failure modes.

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 with no filler or repetition. Every word adds meaning, and it is immediately clear what the tool creates.

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 tool with nine parameters, six required, no annotations, and no schema descriptions, a one-line description is not enough. It lacks parameter relationships (e.g., bolt circle must fit within outer diameter), unit conventions, material behavior, and what happens after creation. The output schema exists but does not compensate for missing input semantics.

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%, so the description must compensate for all nine parameters. It only hints at center hole and bolt holes, leaving material, thickness, bolt count, chamfer, bolt circle diameter, and save_as_name semantically unexplained. Units are only implied by parameter names, not described.

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 uses a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('parametric flange') and names two defining features ('center hole and bolt holes'), which clearly separates it from generic siblings like sw_create_box or sw_create_cylinder. It does not explicitly compare itself to sw_create_tube_sheet, but the flange-specific wording is enough to identify its purpose.

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 is given about when to choose this tool over the many creation siblings (sw_create_box, sw_create_cylinder, sw_create_tube_sheet, etc.). The description only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer selection criteria from the name and brief description.

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