Apply direct property edits to writable fields in CAD documents, with options to save and close after updating.
Apply direct property edits for writable item fields.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| save | No | ||
| updates | Yes | ||
| document_id | No | ||
| close_after_save | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavior. It only says 'apply direct property edits' without explaining side effects, reversibility, validation, or what happens when save is false. The save flag is a boolean defaulting to false, implying edits might be temporary, but this is not stated.
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, which is concise, but it omits essential details. For a tool with a required array parameter and multiple options, this is under-specification rather than efficient brevity.
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's complexity (required array of objects, save flag, document_id, close_after_save) and no schema descriptions or output schema, the description is woefully incomplete. An agent cannot determine correct usage or expected return values.
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%, so the description must compensate. It provides no meaning for any of the four parameters. The required 'updates' is an array of objects with additionalProperties, but the description gives no clue about allowed keys, structure, or examples.
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 states a verb (apply) and a resource (direct property edits for writable item fields), but 'item' is vague and it does not distinguish this tool from siblings like preview_property_changes or apply_changeset. An agent cannot tell what makes this different without inspecting other tool definitions.
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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or any condition that would select this over preview_property_changes or apply_changeset.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.