catia_new_body

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

Annotations already declare the write/non-idempotent/non-destructive profile, and the description adds a genuinely non-obvious side effect: the new body is NOT made active automatically. That is the key behavioral fact an agent needs. It stops short of covering failure modes or naming constraints, so not a full 5.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: what it does, where it sits in the workflow, and the follow-up call. Front-loaded and free of repetition.

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 one-optional-parameter creation tool with annotations covering safety, nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing; the sequencing caveat is the one gap an agent might otherwise hit, and it is stated.

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 coverage is 100% with a single optional 'name' parameter whose default behavior ('Body.N') is already documented in the schema. The description adds nothing about the parameter, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (Insert) and resource (new Body in the active Part), and even pinpoints the UI path (Insertion > Corps). It is unmistakable against siblings like catia_new_part, catia_new_product, or catia_activate_body.

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?

Explicitly frames this as the entry point of the multi-corps method, tells the agent what to do next (call catia_activate_body) and what happens later (combine with catia_boolean_operation). The when-to-use and what-comes-next are both spelled out.

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