Helix

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

Annotations indicate the tool is not read-only and not destructive, and the description adds that it returns a handle to a 1D curve. However, it does not disclose side effects such as whether a new object is added to the active document or how it interacts with the current modeling context.

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 compact and front-loaded: it states what the tool does, defines parameters and units, then gives the key usage note about sweeping. Every sentence carries useful information with no filler.

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 tool with five parameters, no output schema, and sparse annotations, the description covers the essential purpose, parameter units, angle semantics, return type, and how to use the result for a solid helix. This is sufficient for an agent to select and call the tool 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 compensates well by defining radius, pitch, and height in mm, and explaining that angle is the cone angle in degrees with 0 meaning cylindrical and >0 meaning conical. Only the 'name' parameter is left undocumented, which is conventional.

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 opens with 'Generate a Part::Helix curve', which is a specific verb + resource. It distinguishes this from sibling curve/solid tools by stating it produces a 1D helical curve rather than a solid.

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 that the result is a 1D curve and that to obtain a 3D helical solid, such as threads, the curve should be used as the spine of a sweep. This gives clear contextual guidance, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools like add_thread.

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