Create a named, constrained circle sketch on a principal datum plane by defining its center and diameter.
Create a constrained, named circle sketch on a principal datum plane.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | ||
| plane | Yes | ||
| centerX | No | ||
| centerY | No | ||
| diameter | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only says 'create' without disclosing side effects, prerequisites (e.g., an open part), or consequences. For a mutation tool, this is a significant 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?
One efficient sentence with no waste, front-loading the verb and resource. It is appropriately concise for the basic purpose.
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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is grossly incomplete. It lacks parameter semantics, behavioral details, and any guidance on constraints or plane options, leaving an agent unable to call it 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?
Schema coverage is 0%, and the description mentions no parameters at all. It does not explain what name, plane, diameter, or centerX/Y mean, failing to compensate for the schema's lack of descriptions.
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 it creates a circle sketch on a principal datum plane, distinguishing it from rectangle sketch. The verb 'create' and resource 'circle sketch' are specific, though 'constrained' and 'named' add intent without elaborating.
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 implies usage for circle sketches on principal planes but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like nx_create_rectangle_sketch or provide exclusions. No when-not-to-use guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.