rhino_mesh_boolean_difference

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

Description adds minimal behavioral context beyond annotations. Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but description does not clarify whether inputs are modified or new objects created.

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 (one sentence) with no wasted words, but could be better structured by listing parameters or behavior.

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 tool performs a boolean operation with multiple parameters and an output schema, the description is too sparse. It lacks explanation of output, input object handling, and parameter roles.

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% and description does not elaborate on parameters. The phrase 'a - b' hints that a_ids and b_ids are mesh IDs, but no details on name, layer, or doc_id purposes.

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 'Boolean-difference meshes (a - b)', specifying verb (Boolean-difference) and resource (meshes), and distinguishes from sibling tools like rhino_boolean_difference (likely for breps) and rhino_mesh_boolean_union.

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 usage for mesh objects but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs. alternatives like rhino_boolean_difference or rhino_mesh_boolean_union. No guidance on prerequisites or exclusions.

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