rhino_circle

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

The description states 'Add a circle', which is consistent with the readOnlyHint=false annotation and confirms this is a mutating operation. It does not contradict the annotations, but it also discloses little beyond what the annotation already signals, aside from the optional custom-plane behavior.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the primary purpose and includes the key optional variation. Every word earns its place and there is no redundancy or filler.

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 relatively simple creation tool with a rich input schema and an output schema, the description gives enough context to understand the tool's purpose and primary variation. It could be more complete about document targeting or layer placement, but those are covered by the schema and optional parameters.

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 mentions the core parameters (centre, radius, optional plane) but adds little meaning beyond the input schema, which already documents center, radius, plane defaults, and units. Since schema description coverage is listed as 0%, the description provides only partial compensation for parameter semantics rather than thorough guidance.

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 ('Add') and resource ('circle'), and clearly specifies the construction method (by centre and radius) plus an optional custom plane. It is clear enough to distinguish from most curve/primitive siblings, though it does not explicitly differentiate from the similarly named rhino_cmd_circle.

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 implies the tool is for creating a circle defined by a centre and radius, which gives a basic usage context. However, it provides no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no guidance on choosing between this and similar circle/curve creation tools.

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