isolate_elements

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It clearly says the action is temporary and hides everything except the specified elements. It could mention that it replaces any existing isolation state or how to undo it, but it provides the essential behavior.

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 focused sentence followed by a minimal Args section. No wasted words, front-loaded with the purpose. It is an appropriate size for a one-parameter tool.

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 (one parameter, no output schema), the description is complete. It explains what happens, the scope (active view), and the parameter semantics. It does not leave obvious gaps for the agent to select or invoke the tool.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. The Args line explains that element_ids are 'Integer IDs of the elements to keep visible,' adding meaningful semantics beyond the raw schema fields (title and type). This fully clarifies the parameter role.

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 ('Temporarily hide everything except these elements') and the specific resource ('in the active Revit view'). It is a specific verb plus resource and scope, and distinguishes from siblings like reset_view and override_graphics.

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 clear context ('in the active Revit view') and implies a use case (isolating elements). It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the purpose is obvious enough relative to the sibling tools.

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