add_sketch_constraint

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the function without noting potential failures, prerequisites (e.g., active sketch), or whether it modifies existing constraints. This is insufficient 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?

Two concise sentences with no redundancy. The first sentence immediately states the core purpose, followed by examples and context. Every sentence adds value.

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?

The description does not explain return values (though output schema exists), prerequisites (e.g., active sketch), or error conditions. For a geometric constraint tool in a CAD context, more context is expected for safe usage.

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 100%, already documenting all parameters. The description adds no new semantic details beyond listing relation types, which the schema already includes. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 adds geometric constraints/relations between sketch entities, with specific examples (parallel, perpendicular, etc.). It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_sketch_dimension and sketch creation tools by focusing on constraints.

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 mentions it is essential for fully defined parametric sketches, which implies when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, such as add_sketch_dimension for dimensions.

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