geometry_add_sphere

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

No annotations are provided. The description only states the action and returns 'Created sphere info' but does not disclose side effects, model requirements, or whether the operation is reversible. Minimal behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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 structured as a clear docstring with Args and Returns. It is concise, with no unnecessary words, and front-loades the primary purpose.

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?

Given 6 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description covers all parameters and mentions return info. However, it omits context like the need for an active model or coordinate system, which would aid completeness.

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 fully compensates. It explains every parameter: position as center [x,y,z], radius with default 0.5, geometry_name, component_name, feature_name, model_name. This adds meaning that the schema titles alone lack.

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 'Add a sphere to the geometry,' which is a specific verb-resource pair. It distinguishes from sibling tools like geometry_add_block or geometry_add_circle that add other shapes.

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 implies usage for adding a sphere shape but offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like geometry_add_block. No when-not or prerequisites are mentioned.

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