draw_line

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It notes the coordinate system (model space) and units (drawing units), which is useful context, but it does not state whether an active drawing is required, whether the operation modifies the drawing, or what side effects occur. Significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that states the action, resource, and key coordinate details. No wasted words.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is thin. It omits prerequisites like needing an open drawing and does not describe side effects or return behavior. The agent is left with gaps essential for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that start/end are XYZ coordinates and that units are drawing units, adding meaning beyond the bare schema. However, it does not explain the object structure or that z is optional, leaving some parameter semantics to the 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 states a specific verb (Draw) and resource (line) and adds the scope 'in model space using start/end XYZ coordinates in drawing units.' It distinguishes from drawing siblings like draw_polyline and draw_circle by naming 'line', but it does not explicitly contrast with them. Clear but not maximally differentiated.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. The purpose implies that the tool is for drawing a line segment, but there is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., requiring an open drawing) or alternatives. Implied usage only.

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