Move a component occurrence in Autodesk Fusion 360 by specifying dx, dy, and dz offsets in millimeters.
Translate a component occurrence by (dx, dy, dz) millimetres.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| dx | No | ||
| dy | No | ||
| dz | No | ||
| name | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.6.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint false) with no destruction; the description adds that it translates in millimetres, but lacks details on side effects or prerequisites.
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 single-sentence description is very concise and front-loaded, but could be slightly expanded to include parameter context without losing brevity.
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 4-parameter tool without output schema, the description omits critical context like the meaning of 'name', required units, and behavior when values are zero.
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?
With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to explain the 'name' parameter or the expected values for dx, dy, dz beyond what the schema already states.
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 translates a component occurrence by specified displacements, distinguishing it from sibling tools like fusion_move_body which moves bodies.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as fusion_move_body or other transformation tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.