Angular Dimension

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the mutating nature is covered. The description confirms the tool creates an entity but adds little beyond that: no mention of effects on the active drawing, coordinate system assumptions, or layer behavior. This is acceptable for a simple creation tool but adds only minimal behavioral context beyond 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 a single sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action ('Create an angular dimension') and clarifies scope. Every word earns its place.

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 straightforward creation tool with a fully described schema and an output schema present, the description is nearly complete. It lacks only explicit mention of prerequisites like an active drawing or that the dimension is added to the current layer by default, but these are likely standard for the domain and not critical for correct invocation.

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%, with each parameter having a clear description (e.g., 'Angle vertex X', 'First ray endpoint X'). The tool description does not add additional parameter-level meaning; it only restates the geometric concept already captured by the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Create') and resource ('angular dimension'), and further specifies that it measures the angle between two lines from a vertex. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling dimension tools such as dimension_linear, dimension_aligned, or dimension_radius.

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 makes the tool's intended use clear through the phrase 'measuring the angle between two lines from a vertex,' which implies when to use it. However, it does not explicitly compare against alternatives or state exclusions, so an agent must infer usage from context.

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