rhino_add_point

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and coordinates; it does not mention side effects (e.g., adding to the document), return values, coordinate system, units, or error conditions. This is limited transparency for a creation tool.

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 clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is concise and directly conveys the essential information without redundancy or ambiguity.

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 creation tool, the description provides the core information, but it omits context such as the returned object (since an output schema exists), the coordinate system (world vs. local), and units. This leaves some gaps for an agent needing full contextual understanding, but the simplicity of the operation mitigates the impact.

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 schema already defines x, y, z as integer coordinates with defaults. The description adds 'Point coordinates' which reinforces but does not significantly expand on the schema. Since all parameters are covered by the schema, the addition is useful but minimal, meriting a baseline score.

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 operation: 'Add a single point object at the given coordinates.' It uses a specific verb and identifies the resource (a point object), distinguishing it from related tools like rhino_add_control_point and rhino_add_point_cloud even though alternatives are not named.

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 explains what the tool does but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus similar point-creation tools. No alternative tools are mentioned, and no context is given for choosing this over others, leaving some ambiguity for the agent.

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