Execute Archicad API Command

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses critical workflow dependencies, port requirement, and pagination behavior via 'next_page_token'. It does not state load safety or side-effect profile, but the provided behavioral details are meaningful and non-obvious.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then provides critical workflow in a concise, imperative manner. Every sentence adds value, and the length is appropriate for the complexity.

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 the tool is a generic execution gateway with no output schema and sparse input schema, the description adequately covers the essential workflow: schema retrieval, port requirement, and pagination. It could mention error handling or return format, but the reference to the schema tool handles command-specific details.

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 compensates by explaining that 'name' is the command and that 'arguments' must include 'port' and optionally 'page_token'. It also directs users to 'archicad_get_command_schema' for exact structure, adding significant semantic value over the bare schema.

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 'Executes a specific Archicad API command by its name' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like listing commands, discovery, or getting schemas by focusing on execution.

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?

Provides strong usage context: MUST call 'archicad_get_command_schema' first, includes 'port' from 'discovery_list_active_archicads', and explains pagination handling. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use instructions, but the workflow guidance is clear and actionable.

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