cst_get_mesh_info

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

Discloses mode-dependent behavior (connected vs offline) which is important. With no annotations, description carries full burden; it does not mention read-only nature, authorization needs, or performance implications, which are minor gaps.

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 concise sentences, no wasted words. Action stated upfront, mode clarification in second sentence. Perfectly structured.

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?

Adequate for a zero-parameter tool, but lacking output schema or detailed description of returned data (e.g., types of statistics). Could be more complete by listing example outputs.

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?

No parameters; baseline is 4 per rules. Description adds meaning by explaining what is returned in each mode, fulfilling the requirement for zero-parameter tools.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get current mesh statistics and settings', specifying the resource and action. It distinguishes between connected and offline modes, adding precision. However, it could more explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like cst_get_mesh_quality.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The mode description hints at context, but does not mention when to prefer this over cst_get_mesh_quality or other mesh tools.

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