generate_precise_cap

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states 'deterministic CadQuery, no network call,' which is helpful for safety and behavior. However, it does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., if any files are modified) or output format specifics.

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 purpose, then constraints, then behavioral info. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose and constraints well, but does not specify how to choose output format (STL vs STEP) or if an additional parameter is needed. Given the lack of output schema, this is a minor 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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond schema by clarifying input format (JSON only, no image), and alludes to default values for parameters like threadDepth and threadStarts, enhancing understanding.

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 generates a threaded cap STL/STEP from measured opening dimensions, specifying the resource (threaded cap) and action (generate). It distinguishes from sibling tools (fill, generate_visual_mesh, repair_mesh) which have different purposes.

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 explicitly says it 'takes structured JSON only (no image)' and that vision/dimension extraction happens client-side before calling this tool, clarifying when to use it. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but sibling context makes the distinction clear.

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