step_file_info

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

The description mentions that it parses the STEP ASCII header, is fast, and requires no external backend. With no annotations provided, it adequately discloses the tool's behavior for a simple metadata extraction tool, though it omits error handling details.

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 concise with three clear parts: main action, details, and usage recommendation. Every sentence adds value, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 parameter and no output schema, the description covers what the tool does, what metadata it returns, and why to use it. It is complete and leaves no major gaps.

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 adds meaning to the single parameter 'file_path' by specifying it expects '.step' or '.stp' files, which is not in the schema. This fully compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 'Extract metadata from a STEP file' and lists specific metadata like product names, body count, and file schema. It distinguishes from sibling 'import_step_file' as it does not convert the file.

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 explicitly advises to use this tool to inspect a file before deciding to import it, providing clear usage context. It does not explicitly name an alternative but implies the alternative is to use 'import_step_file' for conversion.

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