Create BIM Model Revision

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, etc. The description adds value by disclosing that missing uploads result in 'unpublished' status, the use of geometry_file_id, and the HTTP 201 response. No contradiction with annotations.

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 relatively concise but includes all necessary information: purpose, conditional behavior, guidance on geometry_file_id, response status, and required params. It is well-structured with front-loaded purpose.

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 no output schema, the description explains the return value (created object on 201). It covers parameter requirements and mentions the API endpoint. Missing error details, but overall sufficient for a 2-parameter tool.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds meaning beyond schema by explaining the conditional behavior of the bim_model_revision parameter regarding uploads and artifact references, and how geometry_file_id is retrieved.

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 'Create a Revision for a BIM Model.' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling BIM tools by focusing on revisions and providing details on publish status and geometry_file_id.

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 gives context on when the tool creates an unpublished revision if uploads are omitted and references the BIM File Extractions API. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool compared to alternatives like create_bim_model or create_bim_model_revision_plan.

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