get_current_view_elements

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the active-view scoping and the optional levels/location enrichment, but omits important behavior: what happens if no view is active, and that results are capped by a default limit of 5000 and may be truncated.

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?

A single efficient sentence with the core scope front-loaded and the optional enrichments trailing. No waste, though it could carry a needed caveat about truncation without becoming bloated.

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?

An output schema exists so return values needn't be explained. However, for a list tool with a 5000-row default cap, the description should warn about truncation and the no-active-view case; those omissions leave meaningful gaps for correct invocation.

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. It maps 'level and location information' to include_levels and include_location, but says nothing about the limit parameter or its 5000 default, leaving truncation behavior undocumented for one of three params.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Lists elements visible in the active view'. An agent immediately understands the operation. It doesn't differentiate itself from nearby siblings like get_current_view_info or list_revit_views, so it falls 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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives such as get_current_view_info for view metadata, and no note on prerequisites like an active document/view. Usage is only implied by the phrase 'active view'.

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