sketch_linear_pattern

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

No annotations are provided, so the description is the sole source. It mentions 'selected sketch entities' but does not explain selection requirements, error conditions, or whether the tool modifies the sketch. The core function is stated but behavioral details are lacking.

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 that front-load the action. No wasted words, and structure is clear.

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 a generic input schema and no annotations, the description should provide more guidance on the expected properties of 'input_data' and explain the output. It only hints at parameters without detail, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 input schema has a single generic 'input_data' parameter with a non-informative description. The tool description adds only abstract terms ('direction', 'spacing', 'count') without specifying how they map to the input data structure. Schema coverage is 100% but description adds minimal value.

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?

Description clearly states it creates a linear pattern of sketch entities, with specific examples like hole patterns and vent grilles. It distinguishes from the sibling tool sketch_circular_pattern by specifying 'linear', making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Description implies usage by listing typical applications, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives like sketch_circular_pattern. The guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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