rhino_import_ifc

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds that each entity is mapped to a layer under target_layer_root and that import is 'bridge only', providing behavioral context beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 no filler. Every word adds value: action, resource, mapping rule, and constraint. Properly front-loaded.

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?

Covers the core purpose and a key behavioral nuance (bridge only, layer mapping). With an output schema present, return values need not be described. Minor gap: no mention of optional parameters (filter_by_type, doc_id) or error handling.

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 descriptions cover all parameters with adequate detail. The tool description mentions target_layer_root but adds no new meaning beyond the schema's description. With high schema coverage, a baseline of 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?

Clearly states 'Import an IFC file' with a specific verb and resource, and adds detail about entity-to-layer mapping. The '(bridge only)' suffix distinguishes it from sibling import tools like rhino_import.

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?

Implied usage from name and description, but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., rhino_import, rhino_export_ifc). The 'bridge only' hint provides limited context but no direct comparisons.

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