fusion_split_face

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

Annotations indicate the tool is not readOnly and not destructive, which sets baseline behavior. The description adds that it splits faces by a plane, but lacks details on side effects, return value, or success indicators.

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 concise sentence, but it lacks structure. It does not front-load critical information like required parameters or usage context, and every word does not earn its place due to missing details.

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 tool's complexity (splitting faces with optional selection and plane), the description is too sparse. It does not cover return values, error conditions, or how it complements sibling tools, leaving the agent with insufficient context.

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 description coverage is 0%. The description only partially addresses the 'plane' parameter by listing options. It does not explain the 'body' (required) or 'faces' (optional) parameters, leaving their semantics unclear.

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 'split' and the resource 'faces of a body', specifying the splitting plane options (xy/xz/yz). It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'fusion_split_body' which splits whole 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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not explain when to use this tool versus alternatives like fusion_split_body, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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