catia_hide_show_body

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds the useful clarification that the operation does not delete the body. However, it does not disclose side effects, required document state, or what happens if the body is already in the requested state.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero waste. It communicates the operation and the key non-destructive guarantee compactly.

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 simple two-parameter toggle with annotations covering the safety profile, the description is minimally adequate. But it omits useful context such as which document the body belongs to and how body names are resolved, leaving an agent to infer these details.

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 schema documents the 'visible' parameter (true = show, false = hide), but 'body_name' has no description. The tool description does not compensate by explaining how to reference a body (e.g., exact name from list_bodies), leaving half the parameters semantically thin.

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 states a specific verb+resource: show or hide a Body in the 3D view, and it explicitly distinguishes the operation from deletion. It does not differentiate from other body-related siblings such as activate_body or rename_body, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like activate_body or delete_feature. The description only states what the tool does, not the context or prerequisites for invoking it.

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