mirrored

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says what mirroring does but does not disclose whether it creates an associative feature, mutates the body, requires active-body context, or what happens if the plane or feature is invalid.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the plane syntax is given immediately after without filler. The description is appropriately sized for a CAD feature operation with one complex parameter.

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 mutation-like PartDesign operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the core action and the most complex parameter but omits prerequisites and behavioral consequences. It is minimally adequate for invocation, but not complete for an agent that must know when and how safely to apply it.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds substantial meaning for the complex 'plane' parameter by documenting origin planes, datum-plane handles, and face-defined mirror planes, but it leaves the required 'feature' parameter and the optional 'name' parameter largely unexplained.

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 specific verb and resource: 'Mirror a PartDesign feature across a plane.' It clearly separates the tool from adjacent transformations such as linear_pattern, polar_pattern, and generic transform by naming mirroring and the PartDesign feature context.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives like linear_pattern or polar_pattern. It also does not state prerequisites such as requiring an active PartDesign body or selecting an existing feature before mirroring.

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