Show in 3D

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

Annotations declare this is not read-only (readOnlyHint=false) while being idempotent and non-destructive; the description adds the key behavioral detail the annotation can't — that mode 'all' resets a previous selection filter, i.e. a state mutation. It also discloses the return shape {mode, window}, which no output schema provides.

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?

A single dense paragraph, front-loaded with the core action and then broken down per mode, closing with the recommended next tool. Every clause carries information, though the mode enumeration is somewhat compressed into one sentence.

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 2-parameter, zero-required tool with no output schema, the description supplies the missing return value ({mode, window}) and the workflow continuation. It is nearly complete; only an explicit indication of whether an existing view must be open is absent.

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 coverage is already 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description goes beyond the enum values by explaining the effect of each mode and the conditional default ('elements' when GUIDs are supplied, else 'all'). It does not elaborate on the array/object GUID forms, which the schema already covers.

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+resource ('Shows elements in the 3D window') and then enumerates the three concrete modes with their distinct effects. It draws its own boundary against siblings set_3d_view and capture_view by naming them as follow-up steps rather than alternatives it duplicates.

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?

Gives clear context on how to select each mode ('all' resets a prior filter, 'selection' for the current selection, 'elements' for explicit GUIDs) and routes the agent to set_3d_view / capture_view afterward. It lacks an explicit when-not-to-use clause, but the mode decision guidance is concrete.

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