catia_gsd_point

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

Annotations already establish that this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds mode semantics but no extra disclosure about side effects, geoset placement, duplicate creation, or failure behavior. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences with the main action front-loaded and the modes packed into a compact semicolon-separated list. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary explanation.

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 mode list covers the main scenarios, but for a tool with 10 optional parameters, five modes, and no output schema, the description leaves some mode-specific input requirements to inference, such as which reference is needed for 'center' or 'on_plane'. The schema partially compensates, but the description is not fully self-sufficient.

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 all 10 parameters are already documented in the schema. The description's mode list summarizes how parameters like ratio, distance, and references are used, but it does not add parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, keeping it at the baseline.

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 opens with 'Create a point', a clear verb+resource pair, and enumerates five distinct construction modes. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling point-related tools such as catia_point_coordinates or catia_sketch_point, so full differentiation is left to the agent.

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 explicitly states when each mode applies, e.g. 'on_curve' at a ratio or distance and 'between' two points at a ratio, giving clear call context. It does not mention exclusions or alternative tools, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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