add_remote_displacement

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that omitting a DOF value leaves that DOF free, but says nothing about what gets created, whether existing boundary conditions are affected, selection requirements, or analysis_index behavior.

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 short and front-loads the core action before the parameter list. The 'Args:' line is somewhat redundant with the schema, but it is compact and easy to scan.

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 an 8-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. The output schema covers return values, but missing selection semantics, units, and when-to-use guidance leave important 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% across 8 parameters. The description lists all parameter names and adds the useful 'None frees a DOF' rule, but leaves named_selection, analysis_index, units, and coordinate conventions unexplained.

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 states a specific verb (add) and resource (Remote Displacement BC), so an agent can understand the basic operation. It does not distinguish this from the sibling add_displacement, but the 'Remote' qualifier makes the purpose reasonably clear.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus add_displacement, add_fixed_support, or other boundary-condition siblings. The only usage note, 'Pass None for a DOF to leave it free,' is a parameter behavior rather than tool-selection guidance.

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