geometry_add_circle

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it states 'Add a circle,' implying mutation, it does not describe side effects, required state (e.g., geometry must exist), or what happens if parameters are omitted beyond defaults. No information about rate limits or destructive behavior.

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 brief and includes a structured Args and Returns section. It is not verbose, but the return value is minimally described ('Created circle info'), which could be expanded. Overall, it is appropriately sized.

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 tool among many geometry_add_* siblings and without an output schema, the description adequately explains parameters but lacks context on when to choose this shape and how it interacts with existing geometry. It does not specify whether geometry_name must refer to an existing geometry or work plane, leaving ambiguity.

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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description adds meaningful semantics for all four parameters: position as center [x, y] in meters, radius in meters, geometry_name as geometry sequence name, model_name with default current model. This clarifies usage beyond the schema's defaults and types.

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 identifies the tool as adding a circle to a 2D geometry or work plane. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like geometry_add_block, geometry_add_cylinder, geometry_add_rectangle, and geometry_add_sphere by specifying the shape.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus other geometry_add_* tools. It does not mention prerequisites, such as the need for an existing geometry or work plane, nor does it suggest alternatives.

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