create_sketch_line

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 discloses the faceId-over-plane precedence and the surface-selection options, but does not state whether the operation mutates the document, what side effects occur, what permissions are needed, or what the response contains. For a creation/mutation tool this is a notable gap.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the ambiguous surface-selection behavior is addressed immediately. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description is somewhat thin. It adequately covers surface selection, but omits default behavior details, mutation implications, and return-value expectations. The schema fills the parameter documentation gap, so the description is just adequate for a tool of this complexity.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only the faceId-wins precedence, which is already present in the schema's faceId parameter description, and the list_entities source for faceId, also already in the schema. It does not materially enrich parameter meaning.

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 clear action ('Create a line sketch') and identifies the resource. It is distinguishable from siblings like create_sketch_rectangle or create_sketch_circle, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 explains how to choose a sketch surface (plane vs faceId) but provides no guidance on when to select this tool over sibling sketch-creation tools such as create_sketch, create_sketch_rectangle, or create_sketch_circle. Tool-selection context is absent.

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