catia_gsd_multi_section_surface

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

Annotations already declare that this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent, closed-world creation operation. The description adds that at least two sections are needed and that order matters, but it does not add much beyond the annotations and schema, such as failure behavior beyond what the guide parameter already states.

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?

Two tight sentences that are front-loaded with the primary operation and then the essential ordering constraint. No filler or redundant explanation.

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 surface-creation tool with detailed schema descriptions and annotations covering safety and world assumptions, the description is nearly complete. It omits mention of the orientations parameter, but the schema fully covers that, and no output schema exists so return values need not be explained.

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 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter in detail, including the guide-intersection failure condition and per-section orientation. The description repeats the 2+ sections requirement and ordering but adds no semantic detail beyond the structured fields.

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?

States a specific verb (Create) and resource (Multi-sections Surface / loft), with the key input condition of 2+ section curves and optional guide curves. It is clear what the tool does, but does not explicitly distinguish this loft operation from sibling surface tools such as sweep, fill, or blend.

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?

Implies usage through the required 2+ section curves and the note that sections should be listed in lofting order. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no alternatives, and no exclusions relative to sibling surface-creation tools.

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