nx_create_part

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses two key behaviors: it creates a part with millimeter units and it does not overwrite existing files. This adds concrete safety context beyond the name, though it does not explain what happens if a file exists (error vs. no-op), which is a minor 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?

The description is two sentences with no fluff. The core action and location are front-loaded, and the safety note is secondary. Every word 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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential action, scope, and a safety guarantee. It omits edge-case behavior (what happens on existing file) and return values, but these are minor for a create operation.

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 100% – the single parameter 'path' is fully documented as 'Workspace-relative .prt path'. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the action (create), the resource (new millimeter NX part), and the location (below DSH_NX_WORKSPACE). It also adds a distinct safety note about not overwriting, which separates it from other creation tools like nx_create_expression or nx_create_rectangle_sketch that operate on different object types.

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 – you need a new part file – but it does not explicitly mention when to use this over alternatives or any exclusions. Sibling tools like nx_save_part_as or nx_create_expression are not referenced, so an agent must infer context from the purpose alone.

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