rhino_dimension_angular

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

Annotations only indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the tool creates an angular dimension, but it does not mention side effects, required geometry validity, document targeting, or how the operation interacts with the active document.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is concise and easy to parse, though its brevity sacrifices substantive guidance.

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?

Given that this tool creates a geometric annotation requiring a three-point definition, the description is too thin to be complete. It does not explain the roles of center, point_a, and point_b, nor how 'at a vertex' relates to them, making it insufficient for correct invocation without inspecting the schema.

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%, and the description does not explain the meaning or relationships of the required parameters center, point_a, and point_b. The phrase 'at a vertex' does not map clearly to the three-point input structure, leaving the agent to infer how to construct the angular dimension.

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 names a specific action ('Add') and a clear resource ('angular dimension'), and the term 'angular' distinguishes it from sibling dimension tools like rhino_dimension_linear and rhino_dimension_aligned. However, 'at a vertex' is slightly imprecise because the schema requires center, point_a, and point_b, not simply one vertex.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as rhino_dimension_aligned, rhino_dimension_linear, or rhino_angle. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context clues beyond the tool name itself.

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