catia_gsd_intersect

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

Annotations already indicate this is not read-only, not idempotent, and not destructive. The description adds the useful detail that the operation creates either a curve or a point as the result. However, it does not disclose behavior around invalid inputs, non-intersecting elements, or what happens inside the model.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the operation and result types with no filler. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 definition is adequate for a simple creation tool with four documented parameters and safety annotations. It could be more complete by mentioning that the two elements must be existing, intersecting geometry and by stating how the result is returned or named.

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 of 3 applies. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema for 'name', 'geoset', 'first_element', or 'second_element'.

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 names a specific operation ('Create the intersection of two elements') and clarifies possible result types ('a curve where two surfaces meet, or a point where a curve meets a surface'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling GSD operations like join, trim, or project.

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 states what the tool does but gives no guidance on when to choose it over alternatives such as catia_gsd_project, catia_gsd_join, or catia_gsd_split. No exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative conditions are mentioned.

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