circular_pattern

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only states the basic operation. It does not disclose whether the pattern creates new bodies or references originals, what happens to existing bodies, or any side effects (e.g., boolean operations). This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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, front-loaded with the key action and resource. It is concise but could be slightly expanded with behavioral details without losing conciseness.

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 simplicity and complete schema coverage, the description provides a minimal but adequate understanding. However, it lacks details on return value or behavior of patterned bodies, which would help in a CAD context (e.g., are they separate bodies?).

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 100%, so the input schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline of 3 but not exceeding it.

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 states the action (create) and the resource (circular pattern of bodies) with the specific attribute (around an axis). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'rectangular_pattern' by explicitly mentioning 'circular.'

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?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like rectangular_pattern or mirror. It merely states the action, leaving the agent to infer usage context. A sentence like 'Use for equal-angle arrangements around an axis' would improve.

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