rhino_merge_all_faces

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of disclosing side effects and behavior. It only says 'merge' and does not clarify whether the operation modifies the selected polysurfaces in place, requires an existing selection, is undoable, or has other notable consequences.

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 description is a single, clear sentence that front-loads the core operation without unnecessary fluff. The added 'Args' line is arguably redundant and creates a schema mismatch, preventing a perfect score.

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 straightforward face-merging operation, the description conveys the essential operation and target objects. It lacks context about prerequisites, side effects, and selection requirements, and it does not clarify its relationship to the very similar sibling tool rhino_merge_all_coplanar_faces.

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 input schema has zero properties, so there are no parameters that require documentation and the baseline is 4. However, the description's 'Args: controller: RhinoController instance' references an argument not present in the schema, creating confusion and reducing the score.

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 a specific action, 'Merge all coplanar adjacent faces in selected polysurfaces,' identifying both the operation and the target geometry. It is understandable but does not distinguish itself from the nearly identical sibling tool rhino_merge_all_coplanar_faces, so it falls short of a 5.

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 phrase 'in selected polysurfaces' implies the prerequisite that the user must select polysurfaces before invoking the tool. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or comparison with similar face/surface merging tools, so usage context is only partially conveyed.

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