ifcx_build_spatial_index

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

Description indicates the index is 'simple AABB' and 'for mesh bodies,' implying limited scope. However, no annotations exist to clarify safety or side effects. It doesn't disclose whether the index is stored, whether the operation is destructive, or any permission requirements.

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?

Single sentence of 14 words, no redundancy, front-loaded with the main action. Every word contributes meaning.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity, the description omits many details: how optional parameters interplay, what the tool returns (if anything), whether it modifies state, and any side effects. Given no annotations and no output schema, the description should provide more context 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 has zero description coverage, and the tool description does not explain any of the three parameters. It mentions 'session or federated stack' but does not link 'sessionId' or 'stackId' to those concepts, nor does it describe 'cellSize' or its effect.

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?

Clearly states the tool builds an AABB spatial index for mesh bodies in a session or federated stack. The verb 'build' and resource 'spatial index' are specific, and the scope differentiates it from sibling tools like ifcx_create_spatial_structure or ifcx_detect_geometry_collisions.

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 indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, typical workflow steps, or scenarios where this should be avoided. The description lacks context like 'use before spatial queries' or 'not for non-mesh geometry.'

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