sketch_offset

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

The description notes that original entity shape is maintained and parallel geometry is created, indicating non-destructive behavior. However, no annotations exist, and it lacks details on prerequisites (active sketch, selected entities) or side effects.

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?

Three sentences: purpose, behavior, use cases. Concise but the second sentence could be more compact.

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?

Lacks details on output (though output schema exists), prerequisites (active sketch, selection), and parameter structure. For a tool with a vague input parameter, more completion is needed.

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 single parameter 'input_data' is a generic object with minimal schema description. The tool description adds meaning ('selected sketch entities at a specified distance'), but doesn't specify the required keys or structure.

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 creates an offset of sketch entities, generating parallel copies at a specified distance. It distinguishes from siblings like sketch_mirror by focusing on offset, not mirroring.

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?

It mentions use cases (wall thickness, machining allowances, clearance features) but does not contrast with alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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