lathe_finish

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It mentions the default output folder and subfolder option, but does not disclose potential overwriting behavior, the need for an existing preview, or file naming details beyond the schema. This leaves significant behavioral gaps for a tool that writes files.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the primary action ('Export the current preview as a PDF') and then adds a brief, relevant detail about default destination and folderPath. No unnecessary words.

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 tool is simple, with two optional parameters fully described in the schema and no output schema required. However, the description omits important context like what happens if no preview exists, whether files are overwritten, and the exact filename format (though the schema covers the date suffix). These gaps make it only partially complete.

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 schema provides 100% parameter descriptions: 'filename' (base name with date appended) and 'folderPath' (optional subfolder). The main description reinforces folderPath usage, adding contextual value beyond the schema. This exceeds the baseline for high schema coverage.

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's function: 'Export the current preview as a PDF.' This is a specific verb ('export') and resource ('current preview'), and it distinguishes itself from siblings like lathe_preview, which presumably creates the preview, by focusing on finalizing/exporting it.

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 implies usage context by referencing 'the current preview' and the output folder, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any when-not-to-use guidance. The folderPath parameter is explained, but there is no mention of alternative tools for similar tasks.

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