rhino_rectangle

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the description's mention of 'Add' is consistent. However, it does not disclose additional behavioral details such as default layer handling, object naming, or that the output is a polyline object. The schema provides some details, but the description adds minimal extra context.

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, front-loaded sentence with no superfluous words. It efficiently conveys the core purpose and place of the rectangle.

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's complexity (required corner, width, height; optional name/layer) and the fact that the description provides none of these details, it is incomplete. The agent must rely entirely on the schema, which is adequate but the description should offer minimal guidance on required inputs or typical usage scenarios.

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?

The description does not explain any parameters; all parameter documentation is in the input schema, which has high coverage (each property described). Since schema descriptions are already detailed, the description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the baseline expected from the schema.

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 clearly states the verb 'Add' and resource 'rectangle as a closed polyline on the XY plane'. It is specific and distinguishes itself from sibling geometry tools like rhino_line, rhino_circle, etc.

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 a 2D rectangle use case by specifying 'on the XY plane', but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., rhino_polyline for manual rectangles, rhino_box for 3D). No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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