rhino_cmd_mirror

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral details. It does not state whether the operation modifies objects in place or creates copies, whether a selection is required, or if the operation is destructive/undoable.

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 extremely concise, containing no fluff or redundant phrases. It efficiently conveys the core purpose and parameter options in two sentences.

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 omits important context such as the effect on selected objects (in-place vs. copy), any prerequisites beyond 'selected', and details about the return value (described only as 'Dict with command result'). This leaves gaps for a user to infer behavior.

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 lists valid values for the 'plane' parameter ('WorldXY', 'WorldYZ', 'WorldXZ'), providing some semantics. However, it does not explain how each plane affects the mirror operation or elaborate on the parameter's format beyond a generic 'Mirror plane identifier.'

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 tool's function with a specific verb ('Mirror') and resource ('selected objects about a named world plane'). It distinguishes itself from sibling transform tools like rotate or scale by focusing on reflection.

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?

No explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as rhino_move or rhino_rotate. It does not mention prerequisites like needing a selection or how this differs from other transformations.

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