get_bounding_box

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the 'axis-aligned' nature of the bounding box, which is a useful behavioral detail. However, it doesn't mention potential errors, return format, or any side effects (though 'get' implies none). This is acceptable but not rich.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It immediately states the action and the target, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

For a simple 1-parameter getter with no output schema, the description is almost complete. It effectively communicates the tool's purpose and input. The only minor gap is that it doesn't describe the return structure of the bounding box, but this is heavily implied by the tool name and description.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra semantics beyond what the schema says for instancePath, as both mention 'Model or BasePart'. No additional syntax or format details are provided, so a 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 gets the axis-aligned bounding box of a Model or BasePart, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling getter tools by focusing on the bounding box specifically.

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 implies the tool is used when you need an axis-aligned bounding box, but it doesn't explicitly mention when to use it versus alternatives like get_instance_properties or get_descendants. No exclusion criteria or prerequisites are provided, but the context is reasonably clear for a simple query tool.

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