femm_import_dxf

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that `tolerance` merges nearby nodes in problem units and that None falls back to FEMM's default, but it does not say whether the import appends to or replaces existing geometry, nor any permission/session requirements.

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?

Three tightly written sentences with the purpose front-loaded, followed by parameter semantics and the follow-up workflow. No filler; every clause 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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description covers purpose, the tricky parameter, and the workflow, but omits whether existing geometry is affected and any session/document preconditions for an import operation.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the non-obvious `tolerance` parameter well (merge distance in problem units, None for default), but leaves `path` and `session` undocumented, so coverage is only partial.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Import a DXF drawing into the current model'), names the underlying FEMM call (xi_readdxf), and implicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling femm_export_dxf. An agent can immediately tell what this tool does.

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?

Provides a concrete post-import workflow: check with femm_geometry_summary, then add block labels, which routes the agent to the right follow-up siblings. It gives clear context but no explicit when-not-to-use or prerequisites (e.g., whether a document/session must be open first).

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