rhino_selection_bbox

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

The description contradicts the annotation title 'Bounding Box of Selection' by claiming it returns the bounding box of all document objects. While readOnlyHint is consistent with a read-only operation, the conflicting scope is a serious transparency failure.

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 sentence and front-loads the action, so it is structurally concise. However, the sentence contains an inaccurate scope and therefore does not fully earn its place as written.

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 low-complexity and an output schema exists, so a long description is not required. But the key question—whether the bounding box is over selected objects or all document objects—remains unresolved, and no usage context is provided. This is a significant completeness gap.

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 never mentions the doc_id parameter or the 'active' default. With schema description coverage reported at 0%, the description needed to clarify document targeting but does not. The schema's own doc_id description provides some help, but the tool description adds none.

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 names a concrete verb and resource, but it says 'all objects in the document' while the tool name and annotation title both say 'Selection'. This central scope mismatch is misleading: an agent cannot tell whether the tool operates on selected objects or the entire document.

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 given about when to use this tool versus siblings like rhino_bounding_box or rhino_cmd_bounding_box. The description also does not explain how selection is established or when a document-wide result would be more appropriate.

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