cad_pattern

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses behavioral details such as the default angle (360), and warns that NEW operation for cuts 'leaks a stray body'. It explains operation matching seed features, adding valuable transparency beyond basic purpose.

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?

The description is a single dense paragraph that front-loads the main purpose and uses semicolons to separate clauses. It is concise without losing clarity, though bullet points could improve readability.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (12 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the key parameters and behaviors but omits documentation for common parameters like documentId, workspaceId, elementId, and name. It also does not explain return values or error conditions.

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 0%, so the description must add meaning. It explains relationships between kind, directionId/axisId, spacing/angle, count, and operation. However, many parameters (documentId, workspaceId, elementId, name, featureIds, angle) are not described individually, leaving gaps.

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 patterns whole features and distinguishes between linear and circular patterns, specifying required parameters for each. It differentiates from sibling tool 'cad_sketch_pattern' which is for sketch patterns.

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 provides explicit conditions for each pattern kind (kind=linear needs directionId+spacing+count; kind=circular needs axisId+count+angle). It also advises on operation selection: NEW for additive bosses, REMOVE for hole/cut patterns. However, it does not mention when not to use the tool or alternatives.

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