apply_template

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool applies settings including properties, dimensions, and formatting, but does not disclose behavioral details like what happens with overwrite_existing=false, error handling on invalid paths, or whether the model is modified in-place. Adequate but lacks depth.

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 concise with two sentences. The first sentence front-loads the core action. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 complexity (mutation tool, no annotations, output schema present but unknown), the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return value, prerequisites (e.g., model must be loaded), or the default behavior of the overwrite_existing parameter. Important context is missing.

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 100%, each parameter is described. The tool description adds general context ('saved template settings') but does not add specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides. 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 'Apply a template to an existing SolidWorks model' and lists the types of settings applied (properties, dimensions, formatting). It distinguishes from siblings like create_template and batch_apply_template by focusing on applying to an existing single model.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., batch_apply_template for multiple models). It does not mention prerequisites like the model needing to be open or that a template must already exist.

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