solidworks_release

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds behavioral context beyond that: it specifies the action targets 'session handles on their COM apartment' and clarifies it does not close documents. This provides transparency about the scope and side-effects without contradicting 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?

The description is two short sentences with zero filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the clarifying exclusion is placed second. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient.

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 simple tool with a single parameter and an output schema present, the description is complete. It states the purpose, scope, and what it does not do. An agent has all the information needed to decide whether to call it and what to pass in.

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 0% for the 'handles' parameter, so the description must compensate. It does so by explaining that the handles are 'unneeded session handles' to be released, giving semantic meaning to the parameter. It doesn't specify the exact format of a handle, but it clarifies the purpose, which is sufficient for a simple array of strings.

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 action (release) and the resource (session handles on their COM apartment), and explicitly distinguishes itself from closing documents. This differentiates it from sibling tools that handle document operations, so an agent can tell it apart without inspecting schemas.

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?

The description provides clear context (release unneeded handles) and an exclusion ('Does not close documents'), which implicitly guides the agent to use this tool when releasing handles rather than closing documents. However, it doesn't name specific alternative tools or conditions, so it stops short of explicit when/when-not guidance.

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