operate_element

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'delete' and 'hide' without cautioning about permanence or side effects, and gives no indication of reversibility or view-level changes. The action names imply some risk, but no explicit transparency is offered.

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 lists key actions and 'etc.', but it could be more structured by explicitly mentioning the 'action' parameter or grouping actions by effect (e.g., destructive vs. non-destructive).

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?

For a multi-action tool with no output schema, the description leaves out return values, error handling, and prerequisites (e.g., view context for selection actions). The schema's action details partially compensate, but the description alone is thin and does not provide a complete context.

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 schema covers 100% of parameters, and the action parameter's detailed description explains each valid action and its requirements. The description itself adds no additional parameter semantics beyond listing a few action names, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the tool as operating on Revit elements with a list of example actions (select, selectionBox, setColor, setTransparency, delete, hide). However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like delete_element or color_elements, which overlap in functionality.

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 provided on when to use this tool instead of the dedicated sibling tools (delete_element, color_elements). The description lists actions but does not note which sibling tool would be more appropriate for a given operation, leaving the agent without clear usage direction.

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