set_board_outline

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description earns credit by explaining what the destruction means in practice: replace=true removes the pre-existing default outline. It does not describe coordinate behavior or the response, but that is secondary here.

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, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the one behavioral caveat that matters. No filler, though the second sentence packs two ideas together.

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 mutating, 5-parameter tool with no output schema and 0% schema coverage, the definition covers purpose and the replace flag but omits the coordinate/units semantics an agent needs to place the outline 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, yet it only explains `replace`. The four geometry parameters (width_mm, height_mm, x0_mm, y0_mm) are left entirely undefined, including which corner x0/y0 anchor.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Draw a rectangular board outline') and even names the target layer (Dimension layer 20). No sibling tool overlaps this function, so an agent can identify it immediately.

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 gives real usage context for the replace flag: new designs already carry a default outline, so replace=true is needed to overwrite it. However, it offers no guidance on when to call this tool at all versus other design-setup siblings, leaving broader usage implicit.

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