viewer_isolate_models

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true; the description adds the actual effect ('hiding every other loaded model') and the recovery path via viewer_clear, which the annotation alone doesn't convey. It doesn't mention whether the hide is scoped to the session or persisted, so it falls just short of a 5.

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 the effect, then the cost/alternative rationale, then sourcing and undo. No filler and nothing buried.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation; the description covers the effect, argument sourcing, alternative selection, and reversal. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the parameter meaning, and it does: exact-name matching, a concrete example ('Snowdon Towers Sample HVAC'), and the authoritative source for names (viewer_get_state's 'models' list). It stops short of stating array/multi-value behavior or what happens on an unmatched name.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('shows only the given model(s)/discipline(s)... hiding every other loaded model') and names the siblings it differs from (viewer_isolate, viewer_clear, viewer_get_state). An agent can distinguish this from viewer_isolate without opening either schema.

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?

Explicitly says when to prefer this over viewer_isolate ('cheaper... no need to resolve every element's pnt_id first'), where to source the required names (viewer_get_state's 'models' list), and how to reverse it (viewer_clear). When, why, and alternatives are all present.

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