fusion_move_body

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

Annotations indicate the tool modifies data (readOnlyHint false) but is not destructive. The description adds the unit 'millimetres' but does not disclose coordinate system, assembly effects, or whether movement is relative or absolute. Annotations already cover safety profile, so description adds minimal behavioral context.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 simple nature of the operation and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and units. However, it could be more complete by mentioning coordinate system or document scope. It adds value beyond annotations and schema but is slightly minimal for full completeness.

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 description must compensate. It clarifies that dx, dy, dz are displacements in millimetres, which is helpful. However, it does not explain the 'body' parameter (identifier type or format) or whether displacements are relative or absolute, leaving significant gaps.

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 verb 'Translate' and the resource 'a body' with the unit 'millimetres'. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools like fusion_move_component or fusion_scale_body by specifying the action on a body.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as fusion_move_component for moving components. It lacks prerequisites, error conditions, or context for appropriate use.

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