Load Linetype

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

With readOnlyHint=false, mutation is already implied, but the description adds valuable context beyond annotations: it sets FILEDIA=0, selects the appropriate .lin file based on MEASUREMENT, and verifies the linetype actually loaded. These details reveal behavior an annotation alone cannot convey.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core purpose, and the following sentences justify the recommended usage and disclose key implementation details. Every sentence earns its place without excessive length.

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 two-parameter tool with a fully described input schema and an output schema, the description is complete. The agent knows what the tool does, why it is preferable to alternatives, how parameters behave, and what internal safeguards are applied.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add much beyond the schema: the file default and MEASUREMENT-based selection are already in the parameter description, and the name parameter is already described with examples. The description provides no additional parameter-level semantics.

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 and resource: "Load a single linetype safely." It also clearly contrasts this tool with the raw system_run_command form, which helps distinguish it from both linetype_list (listing) and the raw command alternative.

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 explicitly says "Use this instead of system_run_command('_-LINETYPE _LOAD ...')" and explains why: the raw form can deadlock on the FILEDIA dialog and the -LINETYPE prompt. This gives the agent a clear decision rule and names the alternative.

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