rhino_create_curve

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

Annotations provide basic mutation indicators (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) and the description confirms creation, but no extra behavior is disclosed. It does not state that a new object is added to the document or mention side effects, undoability, or interaction with existing objects.

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 efficient sentence with zero fluff. It front-loads the action and object type, making it easy to scan. It could be slightly more informative without losing 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?

For a creation tool with five parameters and a nested point structure, the description leaves out essential context: when to choose this over other curve tools, what outputs to expect (though an output schema exists), and any prerequisites. Relying solely on the title and schema is insufficient for correct tool selection.

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 already describes all parameters (e.g., degree as 'Curve degree (1=linear, 3=cubic)', points as 'Control points for interpolated curve'). The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning and does not compensate for the 0% schema description coverage metric, but the schema itself is adequate.

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 action (Create) and resource (interpolated NURBS curve) and clarifies the method (through control points). It distinguishes from siblings like rhino_create_line or rhino_create_polyline by indicating an interpolation curve, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 given on when to use this tool versus other curve creation tools (e.g., line, polyline) or when not to use it. The description does not mention alternatives, prerequisites, or scenarios that favor this tool.

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