Keyway: Side Section

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

The only annotation is destructiveHint=false, and the description does not disclose whether the tool creates drawing entities, modifies the current drawing, or depends on an open document. It does not clarify placement behavior, units, or side effects beyond stating what the view is.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is concise and easy to parse, though it is so minimal that brevity comes at the expense of useful detail.

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?

With six parameters, four required, and zero schema descriptions, a single noun phrase is not enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly. The description omits parameter relationships, units, optionality semantics, and any behavior context, leaving a significant 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention any of the six parameters. It does not explain required inputs like center_x, center_y, bore_diameter, and face_width, nor the optional keyway_depth and keyway_width, so it adds no meaning beyond the raw 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 states the tool produces a 'Side cross-section view of a keyed bore', which clearly identifies the resource and the specific view orientation. It lacks an explicit verb, but the intent is clear and it is distinguishable from the sibling keyway_draw_keyed_bore by the 'side section' framing.

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 provided about when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as keyway_draw_keyed_bore or gear_draw_section_aa. The description does not mention prerequisites, common use cases, or exclusions.

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