optimize_print_orientation

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

Discloses that it tests multiple orientations, reorients the mesh, and places it flat on the build plate. Also mentions that it defaults to overwriting the input file, which is a key behavioral trait. Lacks details on potential side effects like file modification confirmation.

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?

Very concise and well-structured. Brief summary followed by parameter descriptions and return value. Every sentence adds value with no redundant information.

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 tool with one required parameter, the description covers the goal, method, parameters, and return value adequately. Could mention file format limitations or prerequisites, but overall sufficient.

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 0%, but the description adds meaning to 'file_path' (Path to the STL file) and 'output_path' (Output path, defaults to overwriting input). This goes beyond the schema titles and provides essential context.

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?

Clearly states it auto-rotates a mesh to minimize overhangs and maximize bed contact, which is a specific and useful purpose. Distinguishes from similar tools like 'auto_orient_model' by focusing on printability optimization.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention when not to use it or what prerequisites are needed. The description is purely about what it does, not when to apply it.

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