create_offset_plane

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the core behavior (offset from plane/face) but lacks details like error handling for invalid base_plane, behavior with zero offset, or whether the plane is added to the design. The parameter description for offset adds some context but not comprehensive behavioral insight.

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 concise sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the essential action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 a 3-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It explains what the tool does but does not cover return values, side effects, or logical constraints (e.g., offset direction interpretation). An agent could use it but would lack details for robust 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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it repeats the idea of offsetting. The parameter descriptions in the schema are already clear, so no additional value from the description.

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 tool creates a construction plane by offsetting from an existing plane or planar face. The verb 'create' and specific resource 'construction plane' with the method 'offset' distinguish it from sibling tools like create_angled_plane or create_midplane.

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 implies the tool is for offsetting planes but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like create_angled_plane or create_midplane. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool's name and basic purpose.

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