Rotate a sketch profile around a specified axis to create a 3D solid or surface. Define the axis and angle, then choose to add, cut, or intersect with existing geometry.
Revolve a sketch profile around axis x/y/z by angle degrees.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| axis | No | z | |
| angle | No | ||
| sketch | Yes | ||
| profile | No | all | |
| operation | No | new |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.6.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations show this is a mutating, non-idempotent operation, and the description 'Revolve a sketch profile' is consistent. However, it does not disclose what happens to the document (new feature created, existing body modified) or what the operation enum controls, leaving the agent unaware of side effects.
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?
Single sentence, front-loaded with the verb and key modifiers, no redundant content. Every word earns its place.
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 5-parameter CAD mutation with no output schema, the description lacks essential context: effect of operation modes, what bodies are affected, return behavior, and interplay with the active document/component. Incomplete for reliable invocation.
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 coverage, the description's mention of x/y/z axes and angle in degrees is helpful, and 'sketch profile' maps to sketch/profile. But it fails to explain the operation parameter (new/join/cut/intersect) or profile='all', so parameter semantics remain under-specified.
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 states the action 'Revolve' with the resource 'sketch profile' and specifies the axis and angle, making the operation clear. It distinguishes from siblings via the unique revolve verb, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.
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 statement about when to choose this over extrude/sweep/loft, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The need for a sketch profile is only implicit, so the agent gets no decision guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.