estimate_supports

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool analyzes the mesh for overhangs, implying a read-only operation, but does not explicitly confirm it does not modify the file or require special permissions. It is adequate but lacks explicit safety declarations.

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 highly concise with two sentences and parameter explanations. It front-loads the main action and avoids unnecessary words. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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?

The description lacks key contextual details: it does not describe the output format or units (e.g., volume in cubic mm), nor does it mention error handling or file validity requirements. For a tool that takes a file path, prerequisites like file existence and mesh validity are 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?

The description compensates for the 0% schema description coverage by explaining the file_path parameter (path to STL or OBJ file) and the max_overhang_angle parameter (maximum overhang angle in degrees, default 45). This adds meaningful context beyond the schema.

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 estimates support volume for a 3D model by analyzing overhangs. It specifies the resource (3D model) and the action (estimate support volume), and distinguishes it from other estimation tools like estimate_print_time or estimate_cost by focusing on supports.

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 like estimate_support_material. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or how it compares to other estimation tools. The agent is left to infer usage.

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