add_revolved_profile

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

The annotations already disclose that this is a destructive, non-idempotent mutation, so the description need not restate that. It adds some context with units and a mention of verified measurements and error evidence, but it does not explain what is destroyed, what verification output is returned, or how failures are reported.

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 first sentence is direct and front-loads the action, and the overall description is short. However, phrases like 'independent native SOLIDWORKS engine' are implementation detail, and the closing sentence about inspecting measurements and error evidence is vague and not actionable.

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 five-parameter geometry-creation tool with no output schema and no parameter descriptions, the definition is materially incomplete. It gives units but omits the meaning of the required profile array, axis behavior, angle limits, and what the agent should expect to inspect after the call.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage across five parameters, the description provides only unit information (mm, degrees, kg). It does not explain that profile_mm is an array of 2D points with at least three points, what axis_mm represents, or how angle_deg and corner_radii_mm are interpreted.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Add revolved profile,' which clearly identifies the operation. It does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling profile tools such as add_extruded_profile or add_swept_profile, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to choose a revolved profile versus an extruded, swept, or lofted profile. Prerequisites such as whether a sketch or axis is required are also absent.

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