execute

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

Given no annotations, the description fully discloses behaviors: auto fix hints on errors, show() printing volume/face count, need for measure() after booleans, helper functions, blocked system calls, and save_json usage. This exceeds transparency requirements.

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 relatively long but front-loaded with purpose and key behaviors. Every sentence provides value, though some details (e.g., multiple helper functions) could be more concise.

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 no output schema content, the description covers return behavior (printing, measurement, file paths) and important post-operation checks. It is sufficiently complete for the tool's complexity.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds meaning to the 'code' parameter by detailing what it should contain (build123d Python code, including specific functions like named_face, find_edges). It lacks explicit constraints but compensates with examples.

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 tool executes build123d Python code in a persistent session, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on raw code execution versus other tools like 'script' or 'measure'.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., 'script'). The description implies code execution context but fails to state when not to use it or provide comparisons.

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