plasticity_find_faces

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is carried by structured data. The description adds only the word "current", hinting the result reflects live model state, but says nothing about result size, ordering, or pagination behavior.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the verb and resource come first and the filter list follows. It is dense but appropriately sized for the tool.

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 tool with a nested, undocumented query object and no output schema, the description is only partially sufficient: it names the filter dimensions but leaves matching semantics, units, and return shape unspecified. Annotations cover the read-only safety aspect, keeping this from being a larger gap.

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% and the query object is deeply nested, so the description must compensate. It does list the filter axes (body, surface type, normal, radius, center, bounds, edge count, adjacency), which maps onto the query properties, but provides no semantics, units, or matching/tolerance behavior for any of them.

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?

Specific verb (Find) plus resource (B-Rep faces) with the semantic filter dimensions enumerated. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling plasticity_select_faces or plasticity_measure_face_properties, so an agent must guess which face-lookup tool applies.

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?

Only "Find current B-Rep faces semantically" is offered; there is no statement of when to use this versus select_faces/find_edges, no prerequisites (e.g. current revision), and no exclusions. Usage must be inferred entirely.

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