rhino_subd_display_toggle

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior beyond the tool name. It names the toggle transition but does not disclose scope (selected objects vs. all SubD objects), side effects, or any preconditions; the 'Args: controller' line adds no behavioral clarity.

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 main sentence is concise and front-loaded with the essential operation. The 'Args' block is extraneous and inconsistent with the empty schema, so not every sentence earns its place.

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 no-argument toggle, the core behavior is present and an output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. However, the missing scope/precondition context and lack of annotations leave an agent uncertain about what exactly will be toggled when the tool is invoked.

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 schema defines zero parameters, so there is little for the description to add. However, the description includes 'Args: controller: RhinoController instance,' which is not represented in the empty input schema and could confuse an agent into thinking a controller argument must be supplied; this reduces the baseline for zero-parameter tools.

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 specific verb 'Toggle' with a clear resource 'SubD display' and explicitly names the two modes: smooth and box (control polygon). This makes the tool's function unmistakable and distinguishes it from sibling SubD creation/edit tools and generic display-mode setters.

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 alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites such as selected SubD objects or viewport context. The description explains what the tool does but not the conditions under which an agent should call it.

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