rhino_revolve

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations. Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, implying mutation, but nothing is said about side effects, permissions, or what happens on failure. With annotations present, the description should still add value but fails to do so.

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 at one sentence, but it lacks structure and does not front-load important details beyond the basic purpose. It could be improved by adding parameter explanations or usage notes.

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 (multiple required parameters) and 0% schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It does not explain how to use the tool effectively, nor does it leverage the existing output schema (which is present but not described).

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%, so the description must compensate. It provides no information about any of the parameters (profile_id, axis_start, axis_end, angle_degrees, etc.), leaving the agent to rely solely on schemas without additional context.

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 'Revolve a profile curve about an axis' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the operation. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like rhino_extrude or rhino_loft, which involve different surface creation methods.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites such as needing a valid closed profile or when not to use it (e.g., for non-planar curves).

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