rhino_document_units_set

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

Annotations only indicate readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds the scaling behavior but does not disclose other behavioral traits like whether changes are undoable, affect existing objects beyond geometry scaling, or require special permissions.

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 a single sentence of 12 words, conveying the core functionality and an optional behavior. No unnecessary words or details.

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 simplicity of the tool (set units, optional scaling), the description is mostly complete. An output schema exists, so return values are handled. However, it lacks context on error conditions or the impact of changing units on future operations.

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% in the tool description, so the description must compensate for parameter meaning. It does not describe any parameters, relying entirely on the input schema. While the schema descriptions are thorough, the tool description adds no value beyond what the schema provides.

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 uses a clear verb 'Set' and specifies the resource 'document unit system' with an optional additional action 'scaling existing geometry'. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'rhino_document_units_get' by implication of the set/get naming convention.

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 (e.g., when to scale vs not scale, prerequisites, or side effects). The sibling 'rhino_document_units_get' is not mentioned as a complementary tool.

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