Get a concise geometry summary for a Mastercam operation, including entity counts and bounding box. Avoids dumping full entity details.
Summarize geometry counts and bounding box without dumping entities
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| operationId | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ok | Yes | ||
| data | No | ||
| live | No | ||
| tool | Yes | ||
| error | No | ||
| receipt | No | ||
| documentRevision | No | ||
| operationFingerprint | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"Input schema / properties / confirmedRemoved value: -{
- "type": "boolean"
-}Input schema / properties / dryRunRemoved value: -{
- "type": "boolean"
-}Input schema / properties / feedRemoved value: -{
- "type": "number"
-}Input schema / properties / nameRemoved value: -{
- "type": "string"
-}Input schema / properties / operationId / maximumAdded value: +2147483647Input schema / properties / operationId / minimumAdded value: +1Input schema / properties / operationId / typeAdded value: +"integer"Input schema / properties / operationIdsRemoved value: -{
- "items": {},
- "type": "array"
-}Input schema / properties / outputPathRemoved value: -{
- "type": "string"
-}Input schema / properties / speedRemoved value: -{
- "type": "number"
-}Input schema / properties / toolIdRemoved value: -{}Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "data": {},
+ "documentRevision": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "error": {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "code": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "message": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "remediation": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "retryable": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "code",
+ "message"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "live": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "ok": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "operationFingerprint": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "receipt": {},
+ "tool": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "ok",
+ "tool"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the 'without dumping entities' context, which clarifies the operation's lightweight nature, but does not disclose details like whether it applies to the active part or selected geometry, or any rate limits. The added value is modest but consistent.
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 that states the core purpose and a key differentiator in under 10 words. There is no filler or redundancy; every word earns its place.
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?
With 0% schema coverage and no mention of operationId, the description leaves a gap in parameter understanding. Additionally, 'geometry' is ambiguous—it could refer to selected entities, active part, or something else. The presence of an output schema helps for return values, but the missing parameter semantics and ambiguous resource scope make the definition incomplete for a tool with even one parameter.
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%, so the description carries the full burden of explaining the operationId parameter. The description does not mention operationId at all, leaving its purpose to inference. For a single optional parameter this is a notable gap, though the parameter name is self-explanatory to an extent.
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 uses a specific verb ('Summarize') and identifies the resource ('geometry') and the exact outputs ('counts and bounding box'). The phrase 'without dumping entities' explicitly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_selected_entities that return full entity data. This makes the tool's purpose unambiguous.
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 implies usage when only a summary is needed ('without dumping entities'), but it does not name specific alternative tools or state when not to use this tool. It offers a hint of lighter-weight operation but lacks explicit routing to alternatives like get_selected_entities or get_operation.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.