rhino_solid_pt_on

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

The description does not disclose side effects such as toggling edit mode, requiring a selection, or affecting the display. With no annotations provided (no readOnlyHint or destructiveHint), the description carries the full burden and fails to convey behavioral details.

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 extremely concise and directly to the point, with no unnecessary words or redundancy. It fits within a single sentence.

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 simple toggle-like command, the description is adequately complete. It specifies the action ('enable'), the target ('solid point editing'), and the scope ('selected polysurfaces'). No further context seems necessary for a basic invocation.

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 parameters, so there is nothing to explain. The mention of 'controller: RhinoController instance' appears to be a standard injected argument rather than a user-supplied parameter, so the description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Enable solid point editing for selected polysurfaces' clearly states the action and target. It distinguishes the tool from general point editing tools like rhino_edit_points_on, though it does not explicitly contrast with the similar-named rhino_points_solid_on.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any preconditions (e.g., selected polysurfaces must exist). The description is purely a statement of function without usage context.

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