draw_arc

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behaviors. It only mentions drawing, but omits whether the tool is additive, requires an open drawing, or has any side effects. Behavior is opaque beyond the basic action.

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 sentence, which is concise but too short. It is front-loaded but sacrifices completeness. It could include more structured details without becoming verbose.

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?

Given 6 parameters (4 required) and an output schema, the description is highly incomplete. It lacks context on coordinate systems, angle measurement, or what the output represents. The agent would likely need external knowledge.

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 adds no parameter details. It doesn't explain what 'center' expects (a Point), the meaning of radius, start/end angles, or the optional layer and color. The agent gets no help understanding how to set parameters.

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 it draws a DXF arc using angles in degrees, specifying the resource and unit. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like draw_circle or draw_hatch, which could cause confusion.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use draw_arc versus other drawing tools, nor any prerequisites or limitations. The agent gets no help in choosing this tool over siblings.

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