catia_save_all

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

Annotations already declare the write operation (readOnlyHint=false), idempotency (idempotentHint=true), and non-destructiveness (destructiveHint=false). The description adds valuable context: it specifies how files are named and where they are saved, and clarifies that unmodified documents are left untouched, which goes beyond the annotations.

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?

The description is concise and front-loaded, with the main action stated first, followed by essential details. Every sentence contributes to understanding the tool's behavior without redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description fully explains the tool's behavior: what gets saved, where, under what naming scheme, and that unmodified documents are not re-saved. This is sufficient for an agent to understand the outcome of the operation.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning by explaining that 'folder' is the target directory for all saved files and 'file_name' determines the root product's file name, along with the naming conventions for parts and products.

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 clearly states the specific verb ('Save') and resource ('whole assembly'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like catia_save_document by emphasizing that it saves every new or modified part/sub-product, not just a single document.

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?

The description implies when to use it (to save the entire assembly with multiple changes), but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over alternatives such as catia_save_document, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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