plasticity_create_text

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

Annotations already declare non-readonly, destructive, and non-open-world behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: font size is nominal millimeters, the operation may create multiple Wires and Regions, and the exact curve bounds should be inspected before downstream use. It does not contradict annotations.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action and outcome. Each sentence contributes relevant information: the creation scope, the unit caveat, and the downstream verification warning.

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?

Complete enough for a parameterless creation tool with annotations and no output schema: it states what is produced, the unit assumption, and a verification step. It does not explain how the text content is supplied or selected, which is a minor gap for an agent invoking it.

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 and the schema is empty, so the baseline is 4. The description's mention of font size adds context about units, but there are no actual parameters for it to clarify.

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?

States a specific verb (Create), resource (Plasticity-native closed Wire outlines for text), and scope (at a world or construction-plane baseline origin). It is clearly distinguishable from sibling curve creation tools such as create_polyline or create_nurbs_curve because it targets text outlines.

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?

Provides clear downstream-use context ('before using the outlines for embossing, engraving, or clearance-critical geometry'), which implies when the output matters. It does not explicitly compare against alternatives or say when not to use this tool, so it falls short of a 5.

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