sw_generate_fastener

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description is consistent by noting a new document and cosmetic thread. However, it does not explain the save/overwrite side effects or what happens to existing files beyond what the schema already says.

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?

It is a single tight sentence with no wasted words and the resource is front-loaded. It is grammatically a fragment and omits an explicit action, which slightly weakens structure.

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 schema and destructive annotation, the description covers the core creation context. It is still thin for a document/file-producing tool and does not address routing to alternatives or return/side-effect details.

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 80%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds ISO standard context but does not map those standards to the kind enum or clarify size/length semantics 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 names a specific resource (metric fastener) and creation context (new document), with ISO standards that clarify the part family. It lacks an explicit verb and does not directly distinguish itself from sibling sw_insert_fastener, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus sw_insert_fastener or sw_generate_part. The only implied usage is that it produces a new fastener part, but no conditions or exclusions are stated.

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