nx_create_drawing_sheet

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the geometry prerequisite, but not whether this mutates the active part, how duplicate sheet names are handled, what permissions or open-part state are required, or what side effects occur.

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?

Two short sentences, with the primary action front-loaded and the prerequisite following. There is no redundant or filler text.

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 five-parameter mutation tool with no annotations, the description is too sparse. The output schema covers return values, but the description does not compensate for the missing parameter and behavioral detail.

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 description coverage is 0% across five parameters. The description only vaguely references 'the given model view' and does not explain name, size, scale, projection, defaults, or allowed values, leaving parameter meaning almost entirely undocumented.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Create a drawing sheet' and 'place a base view.' The phrase 'base view' distinguishes it from sibling tools such as nx_create_projected_view, and an agent can tell what the tool does without opening the schema.

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?

It gives a prerequisite ('The part must already contain geometry') but does not explicitly state when to choose this tool versus alternatives like nx_create_projected_view or when not to use it. Usage is therefore implied rather than fully guided.

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