rhino_move_uvn

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

The description only says 'Enter MoveUVN mode' without disclosing side effects, whether it toggles a state, or how it interacts with existing selections. No behavioral details are provided, and there are no annotations to supplement.

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, concise sentence that directly states the core action. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity, though it could be more informative without becoming verbose.

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 lacks crucial context such as what 'MoveUVN mode' is, how the mode is entered, what the user needs to pre-select, or what the expected outcome is. It is too sparse for an agent to use confidently.

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?

There are no parameters in the schema, so the description adds no parameter-specific information. This matches the baseline for high schema coverage (vacuously 100%) with no parameter details in the description.

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 clear action (moving control points along U, V, N directions) but uses the jargon 'MoveUVN mode' without defining what that entails. It gives a basic purpose but lacks specificity about the exact behavior or scope.

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 provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or conditions that would differentiate it from other control-point editing tools.

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