CreateSlabs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the parenthetical '(Tapir, Element Commands)', which is a taxonomy tag rather than behavioral context; it says nothing about project state requirements, whether creation is undoable, or what happens on partial failure.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with the verb first. The trailing '(Tapir, Element Commands)' parenthetical is the only mild filler, but the whole definition is compact and not padded.

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?

This is a destructive write tool with a deeply nested schema and no output schema. The description omits what the call returns (e.g., created element IDs), whether the slabs bind to existing stories, and how the legacy 'polygonCoordinates' alias behaves, leaving real gaps for a mutation of this complexity.

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 schema already documents the single 'slabsData' array and every nested field (level, thickness, holes, referencePlaneLocation, etc.). The description's phrase 'based on the given parameters' adds nothing beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Creates Slab elements'), which is enough to distinguish it broadly from siblings like CreateWalls or CreateZones. However, it does not differentiate itself from the near-identical sibling 'archicad_create_slabs', leaving the agent unable to tell the two apart without inspecting schemas.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus 'archicad_create_slabs', 'archicad_create_meshes', or 'CreateWalls'. No prerequisites (active project, story/level availability) or exclusions are stated.

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