get_geo_summary

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

由于没有 annotations，描述承担了行为披露的全部责任。它详细说明了自动降级行为：point_count 超过 max_points_for_full 时跳过 sample_points 和详细 attributes/groups，并解释了原因（避免大几何撑爆 MCP）。这提供了 schema 之外的宝贵行为上下文，但未提及是否只读（尽管从内容显然可推断），因此给予 4 分。

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?

描述结构清晰，首句点题，随后用列举方式说明返回内容，再描述降级行为，最后给出对比和适用场景。每一句都有实际价值，没有冗余或重复信息，在长度和信息密度之间取得了很好的平衡。

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?

工具没有输出 schema，描述列出了返回的核心数据（计数、bbox、attributes/groups 列表、属性采样）以及降级行为，足以让代理理解返回内容和执行成本。未给出 bbox 六元组的顺序等具体格式，但整体完整性较高，足以支持工具选择与调用决策。

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 描述覆盖率为 0%，描述为 sample_size（前 N 个点采样）和 max_points_for_full（降级阈值）补充了关键语义。但 ctx 和 node_path 仍未在描述中解释，尽管这两个参数名称相对直观。考虑到核心参数已说明，而通用上下文参数缺失，评分为 3。

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?

描述以明确动词'获取'和资源'几何节点的轻量级概要信息'开头，并枚举返回内容（point/primitive/vertex 计数、bbox 6 元、attributes/groups 列表、采样点）。同时通过与 get_geometry_info 和 get_geometry_data 的对比，清晰区分了兄弟工具，用途明确且具体。

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?

提供了明确适用场景'先看看节点生成了什么规模的几何'，并对比 get_geometry_info（更轻）和 get_geometry_data（更结构化）来指导选择。虽然未明确说明'何时不用'，但替代关系与典型场景已足够清晰，属于良好但不完美的用法指导。

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