plot_to_pdf

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true; the description adds real side-effect context beyond them (BACKGROUNDPLOT disabled during plot and restored afterward, layout plot configuration may change). It stops short of explaining how overwrite destroys an existing file, which is the main destructive risk the annotation flags.

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?

Front-loads the core action, then structured WHEN-TO-USE, parameters, example and effects blocks. Every section earns its place; it is slightly long but the example and effects lines are genuinely useful for a plotting 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 4-param mutation tool with annotations and an output schema present, the description covers purpose, routing, all parameters and side effects. Only the destructive overwrite consequence is left implicit, which is a minor gap given the annotation and output schema coverage.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden and does so: path is a .pdf inside allowed folders, layout accepts a name or "Model" and is omitted for the active layout, plot_extents distinguishes fit-to-extents from saved config, overwrite defaults false. It adds the meaning the bare schema lacks.

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+resource: plots the open drawing to PDF using AutoCAD's real "DWG To PDF.pc3" plotter. It also explicitly separates itself from the sibling dxf_export ("para PDF sem AutoCAD use dxf_export"), so an agent can route correctly without opening schemas.

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 "QUANDO USAR" block gives explicit when-to-use guidance (delivery PDF with PLOT fidelity) and names the alternative tool for the opposite case (PDF without AutoCAD → dxf_export). No inference required.

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