rhino_mirror

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

The description mentions 'creating copies,' which implies non-destructive behavior consistent with destructiveHint=false. However, with all annotations false, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention the need for a plane definition, whether multiple objects are handled in one call, or any 3D-specific details.

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 with no redundant content. It is concise and front-loaded with the verb and object. While it is terse given the tool's complexity, it achieves efficiency without verbosity.

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 mutation tool with multiple inputs (guids, plane_normal, plane_origin) and an output schema, the description only states the basic action. It lacks usage context, behavioral expectations, and any note on the required plane definition. The output schema exists, but the description does not set expectations for the returned value.

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 description contains no parameter information whatsoever. It does not reference the guids input or the plane_normal and plane_origin parameters. Given the schema description coverage of 0%, the description was expected to compensate, but it fails to provide any guidance on parameters.

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 action: it mirrors objects across a plane and creates copies. This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from move or rotate, though it does not explicitly contrast with the sibling rhino_copy. The purpose is unambiguous and matchable to the tool name.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use mirror versus copy, move, or rotate, nor does it mention any prerequisites like the requirement of defining a plane. The agent is left to infer usage from the tool name and sibling context.

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