Create a blend surface connecting two edges, filling gaps between surfaces with a controlled curvature. Adjust the bulge parameter to shape the transition.
Create a blend surface between two edges.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| args | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds the key behavioral fact that a new blend surface is created, which is consistent with readOnlyHint=false. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, geometric prerequisites for the two edges, or whether existing geometry is modified. It adds only minimal context beyond 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to stating the core operation. It is concise without being rambling.
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?
The description is too sparse for a tool with multiple closely related siblings and several parameters. It lacks usage guidance, parameter explanations, and behavioral caveats. The presence of an output schema and annotations helps, but the description still leaves important contextual gaps.
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 description alludes to 'two edges,' which maps loosely to edge_a_id and edge_b_id, but it adds no meaning for bulge, layer, name, or doc_id. With minimal schema descriptions, the description does not compensate for the missing parameter 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Create a blend surface between two edges.' It clearly states what the tool does. However, it does not distinguish it from closely related siblings such as rhino_blend_surface_edges, rhino_blend_srf, or rhino_fillet_surface.
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?
There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The name and description resemble several sibling tools, but no exclusions or selection criteria are provided, leaving the agent to guess which blend tool is appropriate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.