rhino_planar_srf

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

With no annotations, the description must convey side effects. It states that the tool creates a planar surface from selected curves, which implies a non-destructive creation action. However, it does not explicitly mention what happens to the selection, whether the operation is undoable, or any other behavioral details, leaving some ambiguity.

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 concise and well-structured. It states the purpose in one sentence and the key prerequisite in another, with no redundant information or filler. The return type is also clearly specified.

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 provides enough information to understand what the tool does and how to prepare for it, including the return format. It does not mention alternatives or edge cases, but for a straightforward creation command, this is largely sufficient. A small deduction for not explicitly stating when to use this over other surface tools.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing to describe. The mention of 'controller: RhinoController instance' appears to be a standard context object rather than a user-supplied parameter, and since the schema shows no parameters, the description is fully sufficient.

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 action (Fill), the resource (planar closed curves), and the result (a planar surface). It also specifies a prerequisite ('Pre-select the boundary curves'), which further clarifies the intended use case and distinguishes it from other surface creation tools.

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 a practical prerequisite ('Pre-select the boundary curves before calling') but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternative surface-creation commands (e.g., rhino_plane_surface or rhino_edge_srf). This leaves the user to infer the appropriate context from the tool name and description.

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