rhino_3view

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry behavioral context. 'Switch to the three-viewport layout' conveys a viewport configuration change and implies a non-geometric UI action, but it does not mention side effects such as preservation of camera positions, undoability, or behavior if already in that layout.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to meaning, making it an ideal concise definition for a simple tool.

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 tool's trivially simple nature, zero parameters, and existence of an output schema, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke it correctly. It lacks only deeper behavioral context, but none is essential for a layout switch.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The empty input schema fully describes the lack of arguments, and the description does not need to add parameter-level detail.

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 states a specific action ('Switch to') and a specific resource ('three-viewport layout'). It is clear and distinguishes itself from siblings like rhino_1view and rhino_4view by explicitly naming the three-viewport layout, though it does not explicitly reference those alternatives.

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 usage is implied: call this tool when you want the three-viewport layout. However, it provides no explicit guidance about when to choose it over rhino_1view or rhino_4view, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The purpose effectively carries the usage context.

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