insert_model_dimensions

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses deduplication (a repeat in a later view is deleted), that pictorial views are skipped unless named, the fallback trigger, and that SolidWorks places dimensions inside views requiring a follow-up arrange. It omits whether the operation touches the model or is reversible, but drawing-insertion behavior is well covered.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then supporting behavior in a compact paragraph sequence. Every sentence conveys a distinct behavioral fact; slightly longer than minimal but no filler.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, and the description covers selection scope, dedup semantics, view-type exclusions, fallback, and the required follow-up arrange step. An agent has enough to invoke it correctly; only permission/undo context is absent.

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% and the nested input_data already documents view_name (with a pointer to list_drawing_views) and include_hole_wizard. The description only adds the implied effect of naming a view ('skipped unless named'); the hole wizard option is left entirely to the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Bring the model's dimensions into the active drawing's views') and immediately narrows scope with the 'marked for drawing' qualifier. This clearly separates it from add_dimension, auto_dimension_view, and add_drawing_view siblings.

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?

Explains the fallback condition (AutoDimension only when nothing could be imported) which implicitly positions it against auto_dimension_view, and gives an explicit downstream step ('run arrange_dimensions afterwards'). It stops short of naming a sibling as the alternative or stating when not to use it.

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