rhino_create_arc

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, consistent with the 'create' action. The description adds no behavioral details beyond the basic creation, such as effect on the scene, coordinate system assumptions, or failure conditions. It is consistent but provides minimal extra information.

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 that front-loads the core purpose (create arc) and key parameters (center, radius, angle range). It is efficient with zero wasted words, achieving maximum 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?

While the schema covers parameters and there is an output schema, the description lacks optional guidance such as the arc being a partial segment (though angle range implies it) or any typical pitfalls. It is sufficient for a basic understanding but not enriched for nuanced usage.

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 input schema already describes each parameter (center, radius, angles, layer, etc.) with defaults. The description text adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema provides. With full schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description does not compensate or enhance.

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) and the resource (arc) with key attributes (center, radius, angle range). It distinguishes from related tools like circle or ellipse by mentioning angle range, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings. The verb and resource are specific and not a tautology.

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 like rhino_create_circle or rhino_create_ellipse. The description only states what it does without context on selection criteria or exclusions. Agents must infer usage from the name and schema.

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