Mostrar componente

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the description doesn't need to restate those. It adds that it selects a component and opens an info window, which gives some behavioral context beyond annotations. However, it doesn't mention side effects like changing selection state or error behavior. With annotations covering the basic traits, this is adequate but not rich.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler words. It immediately states the action and target. Every word earns its place.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does. It doesn't elaborate on prerequisites (like having a model open) or error handling, but these are not essential for a straightforward UI action. The description is complete enough for an agent to understand what to expect.

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 100% – the schema already documents that 'guid' is an IFC GUID with 22 characters. The description only reiterates that the component is selected by GUID, adding no new semantic detail. Baseline for full schema coverage is 3, and this does not exceed it.

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 ('seleciona' and 'abre') and a specific resource ('componente pelo GUID IFC' and 'janela de informacoes'). It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like get_model_components (which retrieves data) or set_selection_basket (which changes selection) by focusing on opening an info window.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description merely describes the action without mentioning conditions, prerequisites (e.g., model must be loaded), or when another tool would be more appropriate. This is a bare description with no usage context.

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