cst_transform_rotate

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavior beyond the schema. It mentions optional center and axis, but does not clarify that the tool modifies the solid in place (copy parameter defaults to false) or what the return value is. This is adequate but incomplete.

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 a single 22-word sentence that efficiently conveys the core functionality without unnecessary detail. It is front-loaded and 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 tool with 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the main idea but omits important context: in-place modification behavior (copy parameter) and that no output is returned. It suffices but has gaps.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds 'around an axis (x, y, or z)' and 'optional center point', which aligns with schema fields but does not add substantial new meaning beyond existing 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 the tool rotates a solid, specifies angle, axis (x,y,z), and optional center point. It distinguishes from sibling transform tools (scale, mirror, translate) by naming the specific operation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like cst_transform_scale or cst_transform_translate. It only implies usage for rotation without giving exclusion criteria.

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