create_sketch_arc

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the basic action, such as that it will create a new sketch (not add to existing) or that it will add arcs inside a part studio. The description lacks details on side effects or permissions.

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 sentence, very concise and efficient. It gets straight to the point. However, it lacks structure (no bullet points or sections) but given the brevity, it is acceptable. The description could be slightly expanded without losing conciseness.

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?

The description is incomplete for a tool with 10 parameters and no output schema. It does not explain what happens after creation (e.g., does it return the sketch ID?) or any constraints (e.g., that the arc is placed on the specified plane). The agent would need to infer from parameter names or trial and error.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it is too short to provide additional context. However, the schema already explains each parameter adequately, so no deduction is needed.

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 an arc sketch) and the location (on a standard plane). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_sketch_circle, create_sketch_line, etc., which create different geometry types. However, it could be more specific about the nature of an arc (partial circle) and the fact that it creates a 2D sketch on one of the standard planes.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use sketch arc vs. circle) or any prerequisites. The description does not mention required context like document, workspace, or element IDs, which are implied by the required parameters but not explained.

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