rhino_volume

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds that it only works on closed meshes and that Brep volume requires a bridge, providing behavioral constraints beyond the 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?

The description is a single, concise sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose. Could be slightly expanded for parameter hints, but remains efficient.

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 presence of an output schema, the description adequately states the core function and a key constraint. However, it does not explicitly clarify that the input must be a mesh object id, which is crucial for correct usage.

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 description does not mention any parameters (doc_id, object_id) despite low schema parameter description coverage (0% as per context). It fails to add meaning beyond the schema, missing an opportunity to clarify the input requirements.

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 verb 'Compute', the resource 'volume', and the target object type 'closed mesh'. It also mentions the Brep requirement for bridge, distinguishing it from potential Brep volume tools.

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 implicitly guides use by specifying 'closed mesh' and noting that Brep volume requires a bridge add-on, providing context on when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it.

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