save_drawing

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

The description adds a verification method (DBMOD returning to 0) that is not present in any annotation, providing a concrete behavioral trait. With no annotations provided, this detail helps the agent confirm the write occurred, though it does not cover failure modes or permissions.

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 two sentences, with the core action first and additional verification detail second. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundant fluff.

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 no-parameter save command, the description covers the primary behavior and a way to verify success. However, it does not explicitly state return values or error handling, but with an output schema present, the description is sufficiently complete.

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?

The tool accepts zero parameters, so the description correctly omits parameter details. The mention of 'active drawing' provides context about the implicit target, which is sufficient for a no-parameter tool.

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 saves the active drawing to its existing location using the verb 'Save' and resource 'active drawing'. It distinguishes from siblings like save_as_dwg by specifying 'where it already lives', indicating a standard save rather than save-as.

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 for persisting the current drawing to its existing file, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use. It distinguishes from save_as_dwg implicitly but lacks explicit exclusions.

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