create_sketch_rectangle

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does reveal that the tool verifies the before/after snapshot delta, but it does not explain mutation scope, required session state, failure behavior, or what the verification enforces.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and has no filler, which is good. However, a 12-parameter tool with no schema descriptions and no annotations needs more than a sentence, so the brevity is under-specification rather than appropriate 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?

The core action and one verification behavior are present, but the description is not complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly. Missing context includes coordinate conventions, plane naming, whether a sketch/document must already exist, and how max_items/min_added/require_no_changed/require_no_removed control the verification.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for 12 undocumented parameters. It adds meaning only for corner1/corner2 ('two corners') and vaguely hints at verification, but leaves plane format, coordinate units, sketch_ref/document_id behavior, and the verification criteria parameters unexplained.

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 names a concrete operation, creating a sketch rectangle from two corners, which distinguishes it from sibling create_sketch_line_segment/circle/ellipse tools. The appended snapshot verification is a secondary behavior and slightly blurs the primary purpose, so it stops short of a 5.

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 the many sibling sketch-creation tools, nor are prerequisites such as an open document or existing sketch mentioned. The purpose implies one use case, but there are no explicit conditions, exclusions, or alternative routing.

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