rhino_boolean_union

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, so the description adds little beyond mentioning 'Bridge required'. It does not disclose what happens to input objects (e.g., deletion, creation of new output), rate limits, or authorization needs. For a destructive operation, more transparency is expected.

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 very concise with one sentence and a note about bridge. However, the term 'Bridge required' is jargon and not explained, and the brevity sacrifices clarity.

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 complexity of a boolean union operation and the low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the concept of Brep groups, the role of the bridge, the output shape, or side effects on inputs. The output schema exists but its contents are unknown, and the description should provide sufficient context on its own.

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 description does not mention any parameters; the schema provides descriptions for a_ids and b_ids, but the overall parameter object 'args' lacks description. Since schema coverage is 0% for the top-level parameter, the description should compensate but does not.

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 performs a boolean union on Brep groups, distinguishing it from siblings like boolean difference and intersection. However, it does not explain what 'Brep groups' means or the significance of 'Bridge required', which slightly reduces clarity.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as rhino_boolean_difference or rhino_boolean_intersection. The agent is left to infer from the name and description, which is insufficient for nuanced selection.

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