rhino_surface_curvature_at

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's mention of 'Evaluate' is consistent. The 'bridge only' restriction adds behavioral context. However, no further details about side effects, performance, or limitations beyond annotations.

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?

Single sentence, no fluff. Essential information is front-loaded: verb, resource, and restriction. Parenthetical adds important context without extra length.

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 low complexity (evaluate curvature at a point) and the presence of an output schema, the description is mostly complete. However, it lacks explanation of what 'bridge' means, which could confuse agents unfamiliar with Rhino surface types.

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 coverage is 0% per context, meaning the schema has minimal descriptions. The description adds no information about u, v, doc_id, or surface_id beyond what the schema already provides. For example, it does not explain that u and v are normalized domain parameters.

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 the verb 'Evaluate' and the resource: true Gaussian/mean/principal curvatures at (u,v). It distinguishes from sibling tools like rhino_surface_normal_at (normal vs curvature) and rhino_evaluate_surface (more general). The parenthetical '(bridge only)' adds specificity.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It mentions 'bridge only' but doesn't explain what bridge means or when this is appropriate compared to other curvature tools like rhino_curvature_analysis. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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