calculate_section_property

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

The annotations are all false and thus uninformative; the description adds useful behavioral context: this recalculates across all sections and synchronizes derived section properties after geometry changes. It does not detail side effects like overwriting manual edits, but the recalculation semantics are reasonably clear.

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 short bilingual sentences. The core action is front-loaded and the trigger condition follows naturally. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, this description is complete: it states what the tool recalculates, the scope (all sections), and when to call it. An agent has enough information to invoke it correctly.

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 has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to explain. The zero-parameter baseline of 4 applies.

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?

Description states a specific action (recalculate) and resource (properties for all sections), with concrete property examples like Area, Iy, Iz, J. It is clear about what the tool does, though it does not distinguish itself from the similarly named sibling calc_section_property.

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 explicitly says to call this after creating or modifying section geometry to ensure properties are up-to-date. This gives clear context for when to use it, but it does not mention when not to use it or name alternatives.

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