add_sketch_dimension

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It details the non-interactive behavior, suppression of sketch-input preferences, and use of dedicated APIs for circles/arcs. This provides significant insight beyond just 'add dimension'.

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 three paragraphs; the first is direct, the second adds motivational context, and the third explains technical behavior. Each paragraph adds value, though the second is somewhat generic. Overall efficient and front-loaded.

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 the presence of an output schema (context indicates true) and the tool's complexity, the description adequately covers the core behavior and non-interactive nature. It could mention prerequisites (e.g., active sketch) but is sufficient for an AI agent.

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% with descriptions for all parameters. The description does not add independent parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 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 dimensions to sketch entities, creating dimensional constraints for precise parametric designs. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_dimension, set_dimension, and add_dimension (drawing-dimension).

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 explains that the tool is non-interactive in automation by suppressing the Modify dialog, implying it should be used in automated workflows. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives.

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