catia_sketch_geometry

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond annotations by disclosing the full content of the returned data (element names, types, coordinates, plus constraints), which is the primary behavioral trait an agent needs to know.

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 short sentences with zero filler. The core scoping statement is front-loaded, and the follow-up sentence adds routing value. Every word earns its place.

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 simple read-only listing tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately characterizes the return content. It does not mention coordinate reference frame or formatting of the list, but these are minor omissions for a tool of this simplicity.

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%, and the schema already explains the single 'sketch' parameter including the default to the most recent sketch. The description adds no further parameter detail, so the baseline of 3 applies since the schema carries the burden.

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 ('List') plus the resource ('2D elements of a sketch') and details what is returned (names, types, coordinates, constraints). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling listing tools like catia_list_features or catia_describe_tree, and the constraint mention separates it from creation tools like catia_sketch_line.

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 second sentence ('Use the element names in catia_sketch_constraint') gives concrete downstream guidance and implies when the output is needed. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as catia_list_features or when not to use it, so it falls short of full exclusion guidance.

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