solidworks_feature

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

Annotations already indicate destructive behavior (destructiveHint=true), so the bar is lower. The description adds dispatch behavior and default fallback details, but doesn't explicitly warn about side effects or document modification.

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 dense but purposeful, listing operations and key usage rules in three sentences. No redundant or fluff content, though the long operation list makes it slightly heavy.

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 complex schema and presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential dispatch logic, field behavior, and units. It doesn't address error cases or return values, but those are likely covered by the output schema.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It points to the schema for operation-specific fields and explains unspecified field fallback and unit conventions. However, it doesn't describe the exact payload structure or the operation field semantics.

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 dispatches on payload.operation to specific feature handlers, listing all supported operations. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by its operation set, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with solidworks_modify_feature.

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 practical guidance on typed field sets, default fallbacks, and unit conventions. It doesn't explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives, but the operation list and dispatch behavior make the use case clear.

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