Purge Drawing

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

Annotations contain only a title and no readOnly/destructive hints, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that unused objects are removed but does not state that purging is destructive/irreversible, whether it can be undone, or whether confirmation is required.

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 states the action and scope with no filler. Every word contributes to understanding what the tool does.

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 parameterless tool with an output schema, the description covers the basic operation well. However, it omits the destructive nature and any guidance on when purging is appropriate, leaving a small but meaningful completeness gap.

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 tool takes zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to explain. Per the baseline for parameterless tools, no additional parameter documentation is needed.

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 uses a specific verb ('Purge') and identifies the exact resource: all unused objects (layers, blocks, linetypes, styles) from the drawing. It clearly distinguishes this from siblings like drawing_audit or entity_delete.

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?

No guidance is given about when to run a purge versus alternative cleanup/audit operations, nor any preconditions or exclusions. The usage context (e.g., before finalizing or saving) is only implied by the tool name.

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