nx_list_drawing_sheets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. Saying 'list' implies a read-only, non-destructive operation and 'active part' implies a prerequisite context, but the description does not explicitly state this or mention what happens if no active part exists. For a zero-parameter read tool with an output schema, this is adequate but not rich.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. The core information (action, resource, scope) is front-loaded and immediately readable.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not explain return values. For a zero-parameter listing tool, stating the resource and active-part scope is nearly sufficient; the main missing piece is explicit prerequisite handling (e.g., what happens when no part is active).

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 tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameters to document. The description correctly does not invent or misdescribe any parameter semantics, matching the baseline for a parameterless tool.

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 states a specific verb (list) and resource (drawing sheets) with scope (active part). It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling nx_list_drafting_views or other list 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 implies usage by naming the active part as the context, but it provides no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternative tools. An agent can infer this is a read-only listing tool, but must decide independently when to prefer it over nx_list_drafting_views.

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