cad_get_variables

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool is a read operation ('reads the assignVariable features') and highlights it makes a single API call, implying efficiency. It does not mention side effects, but as a read-only tool, this is sufficient.

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, front-loaded with purpose and an example. Every sentence adds value: first defines action, second adds implementation detail and efficiency. No wasted words.

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 provides an example and mentions the return format (name + expression) and a single API call, but lacks details on output structure, error cases, or prerequisites. No output schema exists, so more detail would be helpful, but for a simple list tool it is minimally adequate.

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?

Input schema has 0% coverage (no parameter descriptions). The description does not explain the three required parameters (documentId, workspaceId, elementId), only implying elementId refers to the part studio. With no schema descriptions, the description should clarify parameter meanings but fails to do so.

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 lists CADkit variables in a part studio, providing the name and authored expression with an example. It specifies the verb 'List' and the resource 'cadkit variables in this part studio', distinguishing it from sibling tools like cad_set_variable.

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 implies usage for reading variables but does not explicitly state when to use or when not to use, nor does it mention alternatives. The context from sibling tools suggests cad_set_variable for writing, but no direct guidance is given.

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