rhino_offset_curve

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

The description states it creates an offset copy, implying the original curve is preserved, which adds a small behavioral clue. However, it does not disclose what happens to the document (e.g., a new curve is added), any failure conditions (e.g., non-planar curves), or whether it returns a GUID. With all annotations set to false, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, which it does not adequately fulfill.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action. It has no redundancy or wasted words, making it structurally efficient. However, its brevity comes at the cost of missing essential details, so it scores slightly lower than a perfectly balanced description.

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?

Given the tool has three parameters (guid, distance, and plane_normal), one of which is optional, and performs a mutation, the description is too sparse. It does not mention that a curve GUID is required, what the output contains (despite an output schema), or expected behavior on different curve types. The description under-specifies for a tool 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 reported as 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining the parameters. It only mentions 'given distance' without explaining the direction convention (positive=right, negative=left) or the optional plane_normal parameter. This is insufficient for an agent to correctly set the parameters, especially since the schema provides no descriptions according to the signal.

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 creates an offset copy of a curve at a distance, with a specific verb ('create') and resource ('curve'). It implicitly differentiates from rhino_offset_surface (surface vs curve) and rhino_create_curve (new curve from scratch). However, it does not explicitly mention that it requires an existing curve GUID, which is only implied.

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 alternatives like rhino_offset_surface or rhino_create_curve. The description does not mention prerequisites (e.g., the curve must already exist), limitations, or context in which this tool is appropriate. It only states the action without any usage conditions.

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