create_partition_2d

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden and does useful work: start/end are points on the partition AXIS, thickness defaults to 100 mm, and merge=true fuses touching partitions into one outline. It could add more detail about fit_view or the result, but the key mutating behavior is disclosed.

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 compact, front-loaded with the primary action, and every sentence adds information: target layer/units, axis semantics, defaults, and merge side effect. No filler or repetition.

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 5-parameter drawing tool with an output schema, the description provides enough operational context: required inputs are explained, optional parameters have defaults, and the main side effect is stated. The missing fit_view explanation and lack of explicit alternative routing keep it from being fully 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so parameter meaning falls entirely on the description. It clarifies start/end as [x,y] axis points, thickness default, and merge behavior, covering most of the 5 parameters; fit_view is the only parameter left undefined.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Draw one interior partition on layer 'cloisons' (mm).' This clearly separates it from sibling wall/door/window creation tools by object type and target layer.

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?

Usage context is only implied by the phrase 'one interior partition' and the reference 'like create_wall_2d' for merge behavior. The description never explicitly says when to choose this over create_wall_2d, create_wall_loop, or other drawing tools, nor does it state any exclusions.

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