rhino_annotation_scale_bar

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

The description adds context beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false) by noting the bar is in document units and the label reports real-world distance based on scale_denominator. However, it does not detail other behavioral aspects like object creation or potential side effects.

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 short (two sentences) and front-loaded with the main action. It is efficient but could be slightly more structured with bullet points or explicit parameter hints.

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 the output schema exists, return values are covered. However, the lack of parameter explanations and usage context makes it only minimally complete for a tool with multiple parameters and sibling tools.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain parameters but only mentions scale_denominator's role. Other key parameters like location, divisions, label_height, total_length are not described, leaving the agent without sufficient guidance.

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 draws a divided scale bar with a label, using a specific verb ('Draw') and resource ('scale bar'). It distinguishes itself from sibling annotation tools like dimension or callout tools by specifying the scale bar's properties.

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 for creating scale bars on drawings but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. There is 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.