rhino_cmd_sweep1

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions that Sweep1 is run and a dict with 'status' and 'command' keys is returned, but it does not disclose whether the operation modifies the Rhino document, how selection commands are executed, what happens if no curves are selected, or what the 'command' key contains. For a geometry-creating tool, this leaves major behavioral ambiguities.

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 well-structured: a one-line summary, a numbered workflow, an Args list, and a Returns note. It is front-loaded and each section earns its place, though the 'controller' arg entry is redundant with the schema and slightly bloats the text.

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 provides a workflow and return shape, but it leaves out important context: how to construct the selection command strings, whether any objects must already exist, error behavior, and how this 'cmd' variant differs from the sibling rhino_sweep1. The output schema exists, so the return dict description is sufficient, but the operational context is incomplete.

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's Args section is the only source of parameter meaning. It usefully defines rail_select and profile_select as Rhino commands for selecting curves, and closed as controlling whether the sweep is closed. However, it also lists a 'controller' argument that is absent from the input schema, and it does not provide command string syntax or examples.

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 first sentence clearly states 'Sweep a profile curve along a single rail curve,' identifying the specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly distinguish this from the sibling rhino_sweep1 or rhino_cmd_sweep2, but the 'single rail' detail is sufficient for basic purpose clarity.

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?

A typical workflow is provided (select rail, select profiles, run Sweep1), which implies the intended usage scenario. However, there is no explicit guidance on when this tool should be preferred over alternatives like rhino_sweep1 or rhino_cmd_sweep2, nor any 'when not to use' instructions.

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