plasticity_boolean

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds almost nothing beyond repeating the operation choices; it does not explain what geometry is consumed, how target/tool bodies are affected, or what keepTools/revision behavior means.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It is appropriately sized for a concise summary, even though it is under-specified elsewhere.

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 destructive six-parameter CAD operation with no schema descriptions and no output schema, one sentence is not enough. The description omits required parameter semantics and behavioral details an agent needs to invoke it correctly.

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 six parameters, and the description only names the union/difference/intersection values already present in the schema enum. It provides no meaning for targetIds, toolIds, revision, keepTools, or intent.

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?

It states a specific verb ('Apply') and resource ('CAD union, difference, or intersection'), making the basic operation clear. It does not differentiate itself from sibling CAD operations beyond the boolean term, and it does not clarify the target/tool body model.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no conditions or exclusions. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name and operation enum.

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