rhino_section_at_axis

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

The description lacks disclosure of side effects (e.g., whether original objects are modified or new curves created) and does not add behavioral context beyond the annotation's readOnlyHint=false. The annotation already hints at mutation, but the description fails to clarify the nature of the mutation.

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 concise (two paragraphs) with front-loaded action, using backticks for clarity. No unnecessary words, though the second line could be merged.

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 has an output schema, the description adequately covers mode distinctions but omits information about return values, error conditions, or prerequisites beyond bridge versus standalone.

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 tool description adds the constraint that standalone mode only supports 'u' and 'v' axes, while the schema already describes this. This adds some value but is partially redundant with the schema descriptions.

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 tool slices surfaces (or Breps/meshes in bridge) into section curves, specifying the count. However, it does not differentiate this tool from similar siblings like rhino_section or rhino_contour.

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 explains when to use standalone vs bridge mode and which axes are supported, but it does not provide guidance on when not to use the tool or mention alternatives.

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