sheet_info

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

The description discloses coordinate system details (image px, origin top-left, y down) and mentions payload has both px/pt. No annotations are present, so the burden is on the description. It lacks side-effect warnings or error cases but adequately describes output format.

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 front-loaded with 'Sheet detail' and efficiently enumerates attributes without unnecessary words. The additional sentence about coordinate system is justified. Slightly technical but not overly verbose.

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 single parameter and no output schema, the description covers key return fields and coordinate system. It does not include error handling or usage examples, but is sufficient for a straightforward info retrieval tool.

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?

Only one parameter 'sheet' with schema coverage 100% and a clear schema description. The tool description does not add further parameter semantics beyond restating the sheet key format; 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 states 'Sheet detail' and lists specific attributes (dims, vector segment count, linework check, scale status, shape count), establishing a distinct purpose from sibling tools like load_plan or set_scale. However, it could be more explicit with a verb like 'Get'.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as load_plan or takeoff_summary. The description implies its role for retrieving sheet metadata but does not provide context-specific recommendations or exclusions.

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