rhino_annotation_north_arrow

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, consistent with creating a north arrow. The description adds that angle_deg rotates the arrow, but does not detail other side effects. Output schema helps compensate.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence defines purpose immediately; the second adds critical parameter context. Highly efficient.

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 the essential parameters for usage. With an output schema and self-explanatory defaults, it is fairly complete for a simple annotation tool, though it could mention style options.

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%, but the description explains location and angle_deg. The remaining 5 parameters (name, size, layer, style, doc_id) are not described, relying on defaults. Partial value added.

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 'Draw a north arrow centred on ``location``.', which is a specific verb+resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling annotation tools like scale bar or callout.

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 explanation of angle_deg for adapting to true north vs grid north provides a clear use case. However, there is no explicit when-to-use or comparison with alternatives.

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