Retrieve detailed metrics for a single Fusion 360 body by index or name: volume, surface area, face/edge/vertex counts, and bounding box.
Detailed info for one body (by index or name): volume, area, face/edge/ vertex counts, and bounding box.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.6.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description lists returned data but adds no behavioral traits beyond that. Consistent, but no extra transparency.
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?
A single, well-front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys purpose, identification method, and returned data. No wasted words.
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 no output schema, the description explicitly lists return fields. The one parameter is fully clarified. All necessary context for a read-only retrieval tool is provided.
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 has 0% description coverage. The description clarifies that 'body' can be an integer index or string name, adding essential meaning beyond the anyOf type. This compensates well.
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 it provides detailed info on a single body by index or name, listing specific properties (volume, area, counts, bbox). It distinguishes from siblings like 'fusion_list_bodies' and 'fusion_bounding_box'.
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 use when needing detailed info on one body, but does not explicitly state when not to use or contrast with alternatives. Sibling names provide that context, but the description lacks direct guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.