get_selection

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

Annotations are absent, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the tool name and does not state whether this is read-only, what it returns, whether it requires an active part, or whether parameters such as dryRun or confirmed change 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?

The description is short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. The single phrase 'Mastercam get selection' does not earn its place because it adds no information beyond the tool name and leaves every operational aspect undefined.

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 no annotations, no output schema, nine undocumented parameters, and a terse description, the tool definition is incomplete even for a simple retrieval call. An agent would be guessing at the meaning of the parameters and the result shape.

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 description gives no meaning to any of the nine parameters. An agent cannot infer what feed, speed, dryRun, toolId, confirmed, outputPath, operationId(s), or name are for or how to set them correctly.

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 'Mastercam get selection' at least contains a verb and a resource, so it conveys that this tool retrieves a selection in Mastercam. However, it is essentially a restatement of the tool name with the product prefix, and gives no indication of what a selection is, what entities it covers, or how it differs from the many sibling getters such as get_operation or get_geometry_summary.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this tool or when to prefer a sibling. It does not mention context, prerequisites, or alternatives despite the availability of get_operation, get_geometry_summary, list_operations, and get_active_part, which are likely competing retrieval tools.

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