Update BIM Model Revision

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false) are consistent with an update operation. The description adds value by clarifying partial update behavior ('only the supplied fields are changed') and warning about error conditions. No contradictions 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 verbose and contains redundancy (e.g., 'Update a BIM Model Revision' and later 'Updates the specified BIM records'). It mixes procedural notes, a link, and API endpoint info. Could be more structured and concise.

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?

The description fails to explain what happens if the revision does not exist or whether permissions are required. The input schema is complete for three parameters, but the description's extra non-existent parameters create confusion. No output schema, but return behavior is mentioned.

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 input schema has only three parameters (id, project_id, bim_model_revision) with additionalProperties: false. The description introduces parameters published_model_upload_uuid, object_definition_upload_uuid, and geometry_file_id that are not present in the schema. This is misleading and contradictory, as the agent would try to include them and fail.

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 'Update a BIM Model Revision' and later 'Updates the specified BIM records and returns the modified object.' It distinguishes from create and delete siblings by name, but does not explicitly contrast with other update tools like update_bim_model.

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 provides specific conditions for when to use certain attributes (published_model_upload_uuid, object_definition_upload_uuid) and warns that providing them when the model is already associated to an upload causes an error. It also mentions geometry_file_id for 3D files. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus alternatives.

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