catia_gsd_create_geoset

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

Annotations are all neutral/false, so the description carries most of the behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool creates a geoset and makes it the target for subsequent calls, but it does not describe what happens if a set with the same name already exists or whether the previous active target is changed.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. The primary action is front-loaded, and the second sentence provides useful rationale without padding.

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 simple with two optional parameters and no output schema, and the description covers purpose and typical usage. However, it leaves gaps around naming behavior, what happens with the default empty name, and what the caller receives in return.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3 and the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds the conceptual point about named sets but no additional parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 action ('Create a geometrical set'), the resource it operates on, and its purpose ('hold surface and wireframe geometry'). It also clarifies that the created set becomes the target for subsequent GSD calls, which clearly differentiates it from siblings like catia_gsd_set_active_geoset.

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 gives clear context: use this when you need a new named container for GSD construction geometry and want it to be the active target. It does not explicitly say when to prefer catia_gsd_set_active_geoset instead, so it lacks explicit exclusions, but the usage context is clear.

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