Create level dimensions

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

Annotations already cover mutation (readOnlyHint=false), idempotency, and openness. The description adds valuable context beyond that: 'one undo step', placement rules, unit conventions, default settings inherited from the Level Dimension tool, and the return shape including error objects.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then moves through modes, placement, units, defaults, and return format. It is dense but every sentence adds necessary operational detail; no filler. Slightly long, but justified by the tool's complexity.

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 a single complex array parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral and return information: what markers show, where they go, unit expectations, default inheritance, and the returned array shape. Minor gaps remain around permissions and every nested setting, but the schema handles those.

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 top-level parameter 'levelDimensions' has no schema description (coverage 0%), so the description must compensate. It explains the three marker modes tied to 'position', 'element', and 'level'/'static', specifies units (m, degrees, paper mm), and notes that storyIndex defaults to the current story. Nested schema descriptions handle the remaining settings.

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 ('Places') and resource ('level (elevation) dimension markers'), and distinguishes the tool from sibling dimension creators (create_dimensions, create_angle_dimensions, etc.) by specifying level dimensions. The three value modes (story/element/static) make the purpose even more precise.

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?

Usage is implied by the purpose statement, and the description gives placement context (element markers on Floor Plan, others in active window) and defaults. However, it does not explicitly say when to choose this tool over sibling dimension tools or other alternatives, nor does it state exclusions.

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