get_current_view_info

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the return info but does not disclose behaviors like read-only status, error conditions (e.g., no active view), or performance impact. The description is accurate but lacks depth.

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 two clear sentences and a bulleted list of return fields. There is no unnecessary text, and the structure is easy to parse.

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?

Given no output schema, the description thoroughly explains the return values, covering all relevant aspects of a view. The tool has low complexity (no parameters), and the description is complete for an agent to understand what the tool provides.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, and the description adds significant value by listing the specific information returned (view name, type, ID, scale, detail level, crop box, family type, discipline, template status). This goes beyond the schema, which has no parameter descriptions.

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 it gets detailed information about the currently active view, listing specific fields like name, type, ID, scale, etc. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_current_view_elements, get_revit_view, list_revit_views, and set_active_view.

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 implies usage when needing details about the active view but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or provide exclusions. No guidance on prerequisites or context.

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