rhino_export_gbxml

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false, and the description reinforces a write/export operation without contradicting it. It adds the 'bridge only' and 'thermal / structural BIM payload' context, but it does not disclose behavior such as file overwrite, coordinate/unit handling, or failure modes.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds meaning, and the key format and payload are stated immediately.

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 tool is relatively simple and has an output schema, so return values do not need explanation. Still, unexplained phrases like 'bridge only', the undocumented object_ids parameter, and the discrepancy around zone_user_text_key's default leave gaps an agent must resolve before confidently invoking the tool.

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 adds no parameter-level meaning, but the embedded schema does document path, doc_id, and zone_user_text_key. However, object_ids is left undocumented, and the context signal reports very low schema description coverage, so the description could have compensated more than it does.

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 verb ('Export'), the target format ('gbXML'), and the payload scope ('thermal / structural BIM payload'). It is unambiguous among the many Rhino export siblings, though it does not explicitly contrast with tools like rhino_export_ifc or rhino_export_obj.

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 only usage hint is 'bridge only', which is vague and unexplained. The description does not say when to prefer this over other export formats, nor does it mention prerequisites or when not to use it.

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