eda_sch_primitive_polygon_get_all

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It only gives the Promise<Array<ISCH_PrimitivePolygon>> signature and a one-line return description; it does not state read-only guarantees, window-scoping behavior, or what 'all' covers (active document, project, or workspace).

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 compact and front-loaded with the code signature, followed by a concise Chinese summary. There is minor redundancy between the English signature and the Chinese return note, but it contains no unnecessary filler.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, a bare return type is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior. Missing details include the structure of ISCH_PrimitivePolygon, how windowId affects results, and what 'all polygons' means in terms of document scope.

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?

The input schema already provides full descriptions for args and windowId, so the description adds little beyond the baseline. The 'getAll()' signature implies the args array should be empty, but this is not explicit enough to meaningfully elevate the score.

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 clearly names the specific operation ('sch_PrimitivePolygon.getAll()') and states it retrieves all polygon primitives ('获取所有多边形'), with the return type confirming the resource. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like eda_sch_primitive_polygon_get_all_primitive_id, but the purpose is still unambiguous.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives. An agent must infer from the name and sibling list that this returns full polygon objects rather than just primitive IDs, which is not explicitly stated.

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