build_rectangular_pocket

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 explains the effect of reverse_direction, end_condition, and target_bodies in detail, including edge cases like cutting into air. It also mentions the return type (Cut-Extruir Feature info).

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 well-structured with a purpose statement, workflow example, parameter list, and usage example. It is slightly long but each sentence adds value. The front-loading with the Spanish purpose and junior workflow is effective.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (9 parameters, 5 required, no output schema, no annotations), the description is highly complete. It covers purpose, parameter semantics, behavioral details, and provides a concrete example. It leaves little ambiguity for an AI agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema provides no descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It provides thorough explanations for all 9 parameters, including constraints (e.g., width_mm > 0), defaults, and coordinate system context for center_x_mm and center_y_mm. The example also illustrates usage.

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's purpose: 'Hacer un vaciado rectangular en una sola operación' (Make a rectangular pocket in a single operation). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like extrude_cut, create_rectangle, and create_sketch by combining these operations.

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 includes a junior workflow example showing how to use the tool, and implies it is a shortcut for create_sketch + create_rectangle + extrude_cut. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, though the context is clear.

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