Scale a Fusion 360 body uniformly by a numeric factor around the origin; use 2.0 to double its size or 0.5 to halve it.
Uniformly scale a body by factor about the origin (2.0 doubles its size).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | Yes | ||
| factor | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.6.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations indicate mutability (readOnlyHint false) and non-destructiveness, but the description adds the specific behavior of uniform scaling about the origin. However, it does not disclose side effects, reversibility, or constraints with other features.
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 sentence that front-loads the main action and includes an illustrative example. It is efficient but could be slightly more detailed without losing conciseness.
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 simple mutation tool, the description covers the basic operation but lacks information on expected input values, error conditions, or output. Given no output schema and simple parameters, it is minimally adequate.
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 should compensate. It explains the 'factor' parameter with an example, but gives no meaning for the 'body' parameter, leaving ambiguity about its type (body ID or name).
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 'scale' and the resource 'body', and provides a specific example (2.0 doubles its size). It uniquely identifies the tool's function among siblings, which include move, delete, and other operations.
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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like move_body or other transformations. There are no prerequisites or context about when scaling is appropriate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.