rhino_offset_srf

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully explains that distance is positive outward along normals, solid caps sides, and the return is a status/command dict. It does not disclose whether the original surface is preserved, whether the command can fail, or what happens if no surface is 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 description is compact and front-loaded, with the main purpose stated first and separate Args/Returns sections. It is mostly efficient, though 'optionally creating a solid' is somewhat repeated in the solid parameter explanation.

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 two-parameter tool with an output schema and no annotations, the description covers the operation, the key prerequisite, parameter semantics, and the return shape. It is slightly incomplete because it does not explain how it differs from the similarly named rhino_offset_surface sibling.

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%, but the description compensates by explaining both parameters: distance's positive direction and solid's capping behavior. It also mentions a controller argument that is not in the schema, which is a minor mismatch but does not obscure the meaning of the two actual schema parameters.

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 operation and resource: 'Offset a surface by a specified distance, optionally creating a solid.' This distinguishes it from curve, mesh, and SubD offset tools, though it does not explicitly differentiate it from the near-duplicate sibling rhino_offset_surface.

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 provides one important prerequisite: 'Pre-select the surface before calling.' However, it does not explain when to use this tool versus rhino_offset_surface or rhino_cmd_offset_surface, nor does it state any exclusions or alternative selection guidance.

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