Create 2D Drawing

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

Discloses critical behavior beyond annotations: the API is experimental, may time out after actually succeeding, and must not be blindly retried. This is valuable operational context that annotations do not convey. No contradiction with the annotations.

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?

Two tight sentences with no padding. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the experimental/timeout warning is immediately actionable. Every clause contributes.

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 11 parameters, no output schema, and sparse parameter descriptions, this definition omits enough context for reliable invocation. It does not explain what the returned result contains, how the current design is selected, or how options like dimension_strategy behave.

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 only 9% and the tool description adds no parameter-level meaning. None of the 11 parameters are explained in prose, leaving an agent to rely on names and enums alone.

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?

States a specific action and object: 'Create a native drawing from a cloud-saved Design.' This clearly identifies the tool's purpose and distinguishes it from generic export tools by emphasizing 'native drawing.' However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like export_view_sheet.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as export_view_sheet. It implies a prerequisite ('cloud-saved Design') and warns against blind retries, but gives no exclusion criteria or decision rules.

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