rhino_sun_path

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

The description discloses that the tool modifies the document by drawing polylines and mentions the two modes, which adds value beyond the readOnlyHint=false annotation. However, it lacks details on side effects (e.g., overwriting previous paths), performance, or required document state.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core action, and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence earns its place by describing the primary function and the two modes.

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?

While the description covers the high-level behavior and modes, it omits details about the output (even though an output schema exists) and does not explain how parameters like months or hours affect the result. Given the moderate complexity of the nested input schema, more guidance would be helpful for complete understanding.

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 the description only briefly references the center_point parameter in backticks without explaining it. The description does not compensate for the lack of parameter descriptions in the schema, leaving key parameters like months, radius, and latitude unexplained.

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 it draws monthly sun-path polylines on a hemisphere around a center point. It distinguishes itself from siblings like rhino_sun_position by focusing on drawing paths rather than calculating position, and it mentions two operational modes (standalone vs bridge).

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 the two modes but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like rhino_sun_position. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, so usage context is implied rather than explicit.

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