catia_circ_pattern

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds little behavioral context. It does not mention whether the original feature is kept, whether the pattern is associative, or any side effects. The description does not contradict annotations, but it also does not enrich them beyond stating the action.

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 front-loads the main action, with no filler. It could add more value per sentence, but it avoids redundancy and is easy to scan.

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 creation tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain expected results, prerequisites (e.g., an active part with a selected feature), or relationship to similar pattern tools. An agent would need external knowledge to invoke this correctly beyond parameter names.

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 provides complete descriptions for all 8 parameters (100% coverage). The description repeats the axis reference token types already present in the schema ('cylindrical face, an edge, or a line') without adding new semantic depth, so it meets the baseline for schema-heavy documentation.

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 and resource: 'Repeat a feature around an axis.' It clearly conveys this is a circular pattern operation. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like catia_rect_pattern or catia_user_pattern, though the tool name and 'around an axis' partially imply it.

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 such as catia_rect_pattern or catia_user_pattern. The description only explains the basic action without conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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