Create angle dimensions

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent creation. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: it is a single undo step, elements are linked to end points when possible and verified, and the return shape is documented.

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 dense but front-loaded with the core action, then covers input modes, arc placement, and return value. Every clause carries practical information for invoking or interpreting the tool.

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 complex creation tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential creation modes, undo behavior, linking behavior, and return fields. Remaining formatting details (pens, fonts, markers, story) are documented in the schema, so the description is sufficiently complete without repeating them.

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 documents many nested properties, but the description adds relational meaning that the schema alone does not: arcPoint/radius interaction, the arc being centered on the lines' intersection, default placement between far ends, and associative linking behavior.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Dimensions the angle between two non-parallel lines'. It immediately distinguishes this from linear, level, or radial dimension tools by specifying the angle measurement and the two supported input modes.

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?

Explains the two valid usage modes (static line1/line2 or two straight elements) and notes defaults such as arc placement. It does not explicitly name sibling tools or say when to choose those alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to know when this tool applies.

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