catia_gsd_split

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=false, so the mutation and safety profile is mostly covered. The description adds the outcome of keeping one side, but does not clarify whether the original element is consumed or a new element is created, and it references an 'orientation' parameter that does not exist in the schema.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the side-selection behavior. There is no filler or redundant restatement.

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?

With full schema coverage and annotations covering safety, the description is adequate for the basic action and side choice. It still lacks when-to-use guidance and contains a parameter-name mismatch, but the schema and annotations carry most of the remaining burden.

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 itself documents all four parameters clearly. However, the description says 'Use orientation to flip which side is kept' while the actual parameter is named 'reverse', which introduces confusion rather than adding correct semantic value.

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 (split), resource (element), cutting element, and the side-keeping behavior. It is clear but does not distinguish this operation from the sibling catia_gsd_trim tool, which is a closely related surface operation.

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?

Provides only a parameter-usage hint for flipping the kept side, not when to use this tool versus alternatives like catia_gsd_trim. There is no guidance on prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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