get_selection

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It conveys a non-destructive read operation via 'Read' and 'currently selected', implying a snapshot of GUI state, but it does not mention edge cases like empty selection or multiple selections. For a simple read tool, this is adequate but not richly detailed.

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 consists of two concise sentences: the first states the core purpose, the second provides a usage example. It is front-loaded, contains no fluff, and every word contributes to understanding.

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 zero-parameter read tool with an output schema present, the description sufficiently covers purpose and usage. It does not detail edge-case behavior, but the output schema handles return structure, and the tool's simplicity makes this description near-complete.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds context by clarifying that the effective input is the current GUI selection, which is not captured in the empty input schema. No further parameter semantics are needed.

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 the tool reads the current selection in the FreeCAD GUI with a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('what the user currently has selected'). It distinguishes itself from all sibling tools, which focus on documents, objects, or execution, by addressing a unique selection-reading capability.

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 a clear usage scenario: when the user refers to 'this part' or 'the selected face'. It does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives, but since no sibling tool offers selection reading, the context sufficiently guides when to invoke this tool.

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