get_curve_info

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, consistent with the read operation. The description adds specific retrieved fields, but does not disclose error behavior or handling of non-curve objects. With annotations covering the safety profile, this is acceptable but not rich.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists the queried properties without any filler or redundant content.

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 output schema is present, so return values are likely documented elsewhere. For a simple info-getter, the description covers the core behavior, though it could benefit from a note that the provided object must be a curve.

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 has a single 'object' string parameter with 0% description coverage. The tool description implies that 'object' refers to the curve to query, but does not explain how to specify it (name, path, reference), nor any validation rules. The description fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'curve info', and enumerates specific attributes (spline count, point count, dimensions, bevel settings) that distinguish it from similar get_* tools like get_object_info or get_mesh_info.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_mesh_info or get_object_info. It only implicitly indicates curve objects via the tool name and listed fields, but does not state exclusions or context.

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