Create Polyline

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

The description adds the 'lightweight 2D' qualifier and a concrete closed-rectangle example, giving some context beyond the readOnlyHint=false annotation. However, it does not disclose behavior around null color/layer defaults, coordinate system assumptions, or minimum point requirements, which would be useful for a create operation.

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 extremely concise: one defining sentence plus an illustrative example. Every part earns its place, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 simple tool with full schema coverage and an output schema, the description is largely sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly. The main gap is the lack of explicit routing guidance and default-value behavior, but the core invocation is clearly conveyed.

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 parameters are already fully documented in the schema. The example clarifies the points format and shows how 'closed=true' affects the result, but it essentially restates schema information rather than adding new semantic meaning.

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 and resource: 'Create a lightweight 2D polyline through the given points.' This clearly identifies the tool's function and differentiates it from siblings like entity_create_line or entity_create_rectangle by using the distinctive polyline concept. The example further reinforces the intended behavior.

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 on when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as entity_create_line, entity_create_rectangle, or entity_create_spline. The example implies a use case but does not state when a polyline is appropriate or when another entity creation tool should be chosen instead.

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