civil3d_execute

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

Discloses execution in a committed transaction with write access, available globals, helpers, and automatic namespace imports. However, does not explicitly mention error handling or rollback on failure, which would further aid transparency.

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, dense paragraph with front-loaded purpose, using minimal words to convey all necessary information without redundancy.

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?

Covers the return format ('Return a value to get results back as JSON'), available globals, and helpers. Lacks explicit mention of error behavior (e.g., exception handling), but overall sufficient for a code execution tool with no output schema.

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 100%, but the description adds value beyond schema by explaining the code execution context (available objects, helpers) and the confirmed parameter's purpose for destructive operations. It also provides an example for the code parameter.

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?

Clearly states the tool executes C# code with write access in Civil 3D, specifying the verb and resource. It also distinguishes from siblings by referencing civil3d_session and civil3d_command for different use cases.

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 provides when-to-use alternatives: 'Use civil3d_session for multi-step workflows. Use civil3d_command for native C3D commands.' This guides the agent on tool selection.

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