place_family

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the agent knows this mutates the model. The description adds real context beyond that: the family must already be loaded, and properties are applied on placement. It does not say what happens on failure, whether partial placement can occur, or what units the coordinates use.

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 action and both outcomes front-loaded and zero filler. Brevity is appropriate, though it comes partly at the cost of the missing parameter detail noted elsewhere.

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?

For an 8-parameter mutation tool with 0% schema description coverage, the description is thin: units, coordinate frame, rotation convention, and type/level selection are all unexplained. An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, but the input-side gaps are substantial.

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% across 8 parameters, so the description carries the full burden. It only gestures at 'coordinates' (x/y/z) and 'properties'; it says nothing about rotation, type_name, level_name, or how family_name relates to the loaded family list, leaving most parameters as bare titles.

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?

States a specific verb ('Places') and resource ('a loaded family instance') plus the two things it does: position at coordinates and set properties. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings like batch_create_structural_framing_and_columns or modify_or_delete_elements, so differentiation relies on the reader's own comparison.

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 (e.g., the batch creation tools), and no exclusions. The phrase 'loaded family' hints that list_families must run first, but the prerequisite is only implied, not stated.

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