cad_api_calls

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

The description discloses that the call costs no API request, counts only successful calls (2xx/3xx), and relates to a 2,500/user/yr budget, providing useful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 concise sentences front-load key information: what it reports, the counting criteria, cost, and usage context. Every sentence adds value.

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 description fully covers the tool's purpose, usage timing, and behavioral implications, leaving no gaps despite the absence of output schema or annotations.

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?

With no parameters and 100% schema coverage, the description does not need to add parameter details; it correctly focuses on the tool's purpose and behavior.

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 tool reports the count of successful Onshape API calls made in the session, distinguishing it from all sibling CAD tools that perform geometric operations.

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 advises checking before/after live work to monitor quota usage, though it does not mention situations where this tool should not be used or provide alternatives.

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