rhino_circle

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

Annotations only set readOnlyHint=false; description does not disclose behavioral traits such as mutating document, object creation behavior, or constraints beyond the schema. No contradiction, but fails to add value beyond annotations.

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?

Single sentence with clear, front-loaded information; no waste. Ideal structure for quick comprehension.

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 large number of sibling tools and moderate complexity, the description covers the essentials but could mention that this creates a curve object in the active document, or note that plane defaults to XY at center. However, with output schema existing (though not shown), completeness is adequate.

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% at top-level, but sub-properties in $defs have detailed descriptions (e.g., layer, plane, center, radius). The tool description adds minimal new meaning beyond 'optional custom plane', so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Add' and resource 'circle', details method (centre and radius) and optional variation (custom plane), clearly distinguishing from siblings like rhino_arc, rhino_ellipse, and other shape creators.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor alternatives. The description implies use for circle creation but does not differentiate from similar tools or provide context for selection.

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