revit-mcp

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies mutation through actions like 'delete' and 'setColor', but lacks details on permissions, reversibility, or side effects. The action list hints at behavior, but critical aspects like 'Delete permanently removes elements' are buried in the schema, not the description.

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 sentence that efficiently lists actions, but it's front-loaded without prioritization. It could be more structured by grouping actions or highlighting common uses, though it avoids redundancy.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is moderately complete. It covers the tool's purpose and action types, but lacks usage guidelines, error handling, or output details, leaving gaps for the agent to navigate.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by listing action examples (e.g., 'select, selectionBox, setColor'), which clarifies the tool's scope beyond the schema's generic 'action' parameter, though it doesn't detail all parameters or their interactions.

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 clearly states the tool performs operations on Revit elements and lists specific actions like select, delete, hide, etc. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'delete_element' by being a multi-action tool, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other siblings like 'color_elements'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, context, or compare with sibling tools like 'delete_element' or 'color_elements', leaving the agent to infer usage from action names alone.

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