rhino_unroll

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that the surface must be developable but does not state whether the tool modifies the original, how it handles non-developable surfaces, or details about the output (though an output schema exists). Critical behavioral traits are missing.

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 sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's action without waste. It is front-loaded and earns its place, though it could be slightly expanded without losing conciseness.

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?

The description covers the basic purpose but lacks details about prerequisites, error conditions, and behavioral nuances. Given the tool has an output schema, some missing context is acceptable, but overall it is not fully complete for an agent.

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 input schema already describes both parameters ('object_id' as a GUID and 'explode' as a boolean with default false). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate given high schema description coverage.

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 specifies the action 'unroll' and the resource 'developable surface or polysurface', providing a clear purpose. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like rhino_rebuild_surface or rhino_patch, so it cannot achieve a 5.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as checking developability with rhino_surface_developable_score. There is no mention of prerequisites or context, making it difficult for an agent to decide when to invoke this tool.

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