create_slider_mate

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 describes the sliding behavior, direction relative to face normal, and offset effects. However, it lacks details on required permissions, error handling, or side effects of setting limits beyond optional max/min.

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 paragraph of about 80 words. It front-loads the main purpose and then provides necessary details. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Given the complexity (16 parameters, 7 required, no output schema), the description covers the core behavior but does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., mate ID) or address error conditions. It is adequate but leaves gaps for a complete context.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the relationship between instances and the direction of travel, which enriches the understanding of parameters like firstInstanceId and secondFaceId. It also clarifies how offsets shift connectors from face centers.

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 starts with 'Create a slider (linear motion) mate between two assembly instances,' which is a specific verb+resource combination. It clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling mates like create_cylindrical_mate or create_revolute_mate by specifying linear motion.

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 when to use it (sliding), how travel direction works, and that swapping instances reverses direction. It also mentions prerequisites (face IDs from Part Studio) and optional offsets. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternative tools.

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