pattern_body

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, non-destructive operation, and 'Copy' is consistent with that. The description adds that the tool creates patterned copies, but it does not explain side effects such as whether the original body remains, how new bodies are named, or how 'unite' changes the outcome.

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 tightly written sentence with no wasted words. The core operation is front-loaded, and the parenthetical examples add useful context without bloat.

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?

The tool has an output schema, annotations, and strong schema descriptions, so the description need not explain return values or most parameter behavior. It identifies the resource and both pattern modes, though it could say a bit more about how linear and circular modes differ in required inputs.

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 high at 78%, so the schema already documents most parameters including spacing, direction, axis, axis_origin, total_angle, and unite. The description adds conceptual mapping by mentioning 'a row' and 'around an axis', but it does not add syntax or constraints beyond the schema.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Copy a body', and clarifies the two modes ('in a row or around an axis') with concrete examples. It is clear enough to distinguish from most siblings, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from related tools like move_body or boolean.

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 phrase 'bolt circles, rib arrays' implies typical use cases, so the agent can infer when this tool is appropriate. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no named alternatives for related operations such as move_body or boolean.

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