rhino_scale

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the agent knows this modifies objects. The description adds the uniform scaling and center point details, but does not disclose whether scaling occurs in-place, how invalid GUIDs are handled, or any side effects. Given that annotations are present, the description adds some but not rich context.

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 short sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the action and easily parsed, making it efficient for the agent.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple scaling operation, but it omits key details: it does not mention that 'center' is optional (not required in the schema), nor does it explain the default behavior when center is not provided. It also does not specify whether the operation modifies objects in place or returns new ones. With an output schema present, return details are not required, but these gaps make it only partially complete.

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 0%, meaning the schema's parameter descriptions are minimal and not helpful. The tool description adds no parameter information, so the agent must rely solely on the schema's basic field names and types. The description does not clarify the meaning of 'factor' or the behavior of the optional 'center' parameter.

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 (uniformly scale) and the resource (objects), and explicitly mentions the center point, which distinguishes it from rhino_scale_non_uniform. It is specific and unambiguous.

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?

The description does not provide any explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like rhino_scale_non_uniform. It implies uniform scaling is intended, but does not state conditions, exclusions, or provide any decision context for the agent.

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