Keyway: Keyed Bore (front view)

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

With only destructiveHint=false in annotations, the description carries meaningful behavioral disclosure: it specifies DIN 6885 compliance and auto-sizing from the bore when width/depth are omitted. It does not describe side effects like creation of entities, but these are conventional for a draw command and no contradiction exists.

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?

Two sentences, purpose first and key behavior second, with no filler. Every sentence contributes to selection and invocation.

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 six-parameter drawing operation with an output schema, the description covers the view, standard, and auto-sizing behavior needed to invoke correctly. The only minor gap is not explicitly routing section-view requests to keyway_draw_section, but the front-view cue is sufficient.

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 prose must add meaning. The auto-size sentence clarifies exactly what happens when keyway_width/keyway_depth are null, and center_x/center_y/bore_diameter are self-explanatory naming. The layer default is already visible in the schema.

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 identifies what is produced: a bore plus DIN 6885 keyway in front view, and the front-view qualifier helps separate it from the keyway_draw_section sibling. It lacks an explicit main verb such as 'draws' or 'creates', but the tool name and title remove ambiguity.

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 front-view designation is explicit, giving the agent a clear context for selecting this tool over the section-view keyway tool. It does not name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use conditions, so it does not reach the strongest guidance level.

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