rhino_cmd_offset_surface

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It does explain the core behavior and the meaning of 'solid' as creating a shelled offset, but it does not disclose side effects, whether the original surface is preserved, or what happens if no surface is selected.

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 concise and well-structured: purpose first, then args, then returns. The 'Returns: Dict with command result' line is generic and adds little, but overall the text is focused and easy to scan.

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 two-parameter tool, the description covers the essential action and parameters, and an output schema is available. Still, it omits important practical context such as how the target surface is selected, whether prior selection is required, and how to choose between the multiple offset-related sibling tools.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: 'distance' is described as offset distance and 'solid' is explained as creating a solid shelled offset. The mention of 'controller' is a minor mismatch since it is not in the input schema, but the two actual schema parameters are given meaningful 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 clearly states the operation ('Offset') and the resource ('a selected surface or polysurface'), so the core purpose is evident. However, it does nothing to distinguish this tool from near-identical siblings such as rhino_offset_surface or rhino_offset_srf.

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 explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus the many similar surface-offset siblings, nor any mention of prerequisites such as ensuring an object is selected first. The usage is only implied by the first sentence, which is not enough given the overlapping tool names.

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