create_dimensions

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

Without annotations, the description discloses that the dimension line is automatically placed at an offset for readability. However, it lacks details on potential side effects (e.g., overwriting existing dimensions), error handling, or permissions required.

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 concise with four sentences, front-loading the primary action and view constraints. The Args list is clear but could be more integrated.

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?

The description covers purpose, view support, and parameter meaning but omits details like default offset distance, behavior in 3D views, and error scenarios. For a simple tool, it is adequate but not fully complete.

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?

Although the schema description coverage is 0%, the description's Args section defines the parameters: element_ids as 'List of element IDs to dimension' and dimension_type with possible values ('linear', 'aligned', 'angular'), adding meaning beyond 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 states the verb 'Create', the resource 'dimension annotations', and the scope 'for elements in the current view'. It also specifies the view types (plan, section, elevation), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_detail_line.

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 indicates that the tool works in plan, section, and elevation views, providing context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives, which could be improved for better guidance.

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