fusion_cam_create_operation

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it creates an operation, optional parameters are specified, and it warns that tool assignment is needed for toolpath generation. Annotations already indicate side effects (openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false), and no contradictions.

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 concise: two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and key parameter, with an important note. No extraneous information.

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 tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the main points. It could be improved by explaining that 'setup' refers to a setup ID and perhaps the return value (e.g., operation ID). Overall, it's reasonably complete for an agent to use.

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 description explains strategy with examples, and notes that tool_diameter, stepdown, and stepover are optional with units in mm. However, the required 'setup' parameter and optional 'name' are not described, which is a gap given 0% schema description coverage.

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: 'Add an operation to a setup by strategy' with specific examples (face, pocket2d, adaptive2d, contour2d, drill, bore). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like fusion_cam_create_setup and fusion_cam_generate.

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 used when you need to add a CAM operation to an existing setup. It provides a prerequisite note: 'most strategies need a tool assigned before a toolpath will generate.' No explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the context is clear.

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