Explain the Archicad agent workflow

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, confirming safety. Description adds 'It reads no project data' and describes return contents, enhancing transparency without contradiction.

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?

Three sentences front-loaded with usage condition, output list, and safety statement. Every sentence is informative and no redundant text.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description fully covers purpose, usage, and behavior. It leaves no ambiguity about what the tool does and when to invoke it.

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?

No parameters exist, baseline 4. Description adds value by explaining what the tool returns and when to use it, beyond the schema which is empty.

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 uses a specific verb 'use only when' and clearly states the resource: 'observation hierarchy, recommended call order, handle lifetime, and current correctness rules'. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying when to use it (unsure how tools compose or degraded capabilities).

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?

Explicitly states 'Use only when' with two clear scenarios. It implies when not to use (when not unsure), but does not explicitly name alternative tools, though context from sibling names provides some guidance.

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