rhino_curvature_graph

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It indicates a display operation and mentions a return dict, suggesting a read-only visualization, but it does not explicitly state whether the document is modified, whether object selection is required, or what happens if no curves are 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 main purpose is front-loaded in the first line, followed by compact parameter explanations and a return note. There is minimal fluff, though the Args section includes 'controller' which is not in the input schema and could cause minor confusion.

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 covers the basic purpose, parameters, and return type, which is adequate for a simple visualization tool. However, it omits usage guidance, selection requirements beyond the phrase 'selected curves', and explicit safety/side-effect information. The output schema existing reduces the need to document return structure, but the missing usage and selection context leave notable 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must define parameters, and it does: density is 'Number of hair samples along the curve' and scale is 'Scale of the curvature hairs.' This adds real meaning beyond the schema's types and defaults. It lacks units or valid ranges, and 'controller' is mentioned but absent from the schema.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Display a curvature graph on selected curves.' This clearly identifies what the tool does. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling rhino_curvature_analysis, but the 'graph' focus is reasonably distinct.

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 guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives like rhino_curvature_analysis. The phrase 'on selected curves' implies a selection precondition, but it never states how to select curves or when this tool should be preferred over other analysis tools.

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