catia_gsd_extrude

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, indicating a modifying operation, and the description adds that it creates a surface, which is consistent. However, the description does not disclose any further behavior such as side effects, required context (e.g., active document), or failure conditions. It adds minimal value beyond the annotation.

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?

A single, clean sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose. No wasted words. It is appropriately concise for a tool with a well-defined schema.

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 tool with six parameters and no output schema, the description is thin. It does not explain what a 'profile' refers to, how direction is interpreted (e.g., relative to sketch plane), or any behavior when parameters are omitted (e.g., default direction). An agent may need to infer from the sibling tools or schema, which is insufficient.

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 each parameter (profile, direction, length, length_reverse, name, geoset) already has a description in the schema. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 clearly states the action: extrude a profile along a direction to make a surface. It specifies the resource (profile) and outcome (surface), which distinguishes it from solid extrusion tools like catia_pad. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other GSD surface tools like revolve or sweep, though the name implies 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_pad (solid extrude) or catia_gsd_sweep/revolve. There is no mention of prerequisites, nor exclusions. The description only states what it does, not when to choose it.

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