Create a new surface offset from an existing surface by a specified distance in CATIA V5, with optional naming and direction reversal.
Create a surface offset from an existing surface.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | No | Optional name for the surface | |
| offset | Yes | Offset distance (mm) | |
| reverse | No | Offset in the opposite direction | |
| surface | Yes | Surface element name |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.4.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds only that the input is an existing surface, which is already implied by the schema, and does not disclose side effects such as where the new surface is placed or whether an active geoset is required.
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?
Single sentence, front-loaded, zero waste. It is appropriately sized for a simple 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?
For a GSD surface creation tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It does not mention the active geoset context, return value, or whether the original surface is preserved, leaving some gaps for an agent to infer.
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 all four parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, warranting the baseline of 3.
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 and resource: create a surface offset from an existing surface. Clear what the tool does, but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like catia_gsd_thick_surface or catia_gsd_plane_offset.
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. The description merely states the action, leaving the agent to infer context from the tool name and siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.