rhino_cone

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

Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false). Description adds the bridge requirement but does not explain other behaviors like what the tool returns or needs authorization.

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, front-loaded with clear action and resource. Every word earns its place with no unnecessary repetition.

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?

Despite output schema existing, the description omits explaining the meaning of required parameters and optional ones. The bridge comment is specific but incomplete for an agent to fully understand usage without schema knowledge.

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%, yet the description adds no information about parameters (base_center, radius, height, name, layer). The parenthetical only hints at orientation but does not clarify parameter roles.

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 clearly states 'Add a cone primitive' which is a specific verb+resource. The parenthetical about bridge distinguishes it from other primitives like sphere or box, though it's somewhat cryptic.

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 when to use the bridge tool as a prerequisite for non-Z axes, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like rhino_cylinder or rhino_sphere.

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