vw2d_resources

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds a genuinely non-obvious note that default Vectorworks content is included and imported automatically when used, but it says nothing about result ordering, limit behavior, or whether listing defaults has any side effect on the document.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the resource enumeration before the filter note. The nested parenthetical about default content is slightly awkward but every clause carries information.

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?

With four parameters, one required, and an output schema present, the description covers the core selection logic but omits `limit` semantics and any routing versus the overlapping layer/class listers. Adequate to call correctly, but not complete.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate; it does for `query` (substring matching with concrete examples) and partly for `include_defaults` via the 'document + Vectorworks default content' phrasing, and the resource list maps onto `kind`. The `limit` parameter (default 200) is never explained in either place, leaving a real gap.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and the four resources it covers (hatches, line types, classes, layers), matching the `kind` enum exactly. However, it does not distinguish itself from siblings vw_list_layers and vw_list_classes, which appear to cover two of the same resources, so an agent cannot tell which tool to pick.

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 only guidance given is how the `query` substring filter behaves, with examples ("Beton", "ISO-02"). There is no statement of when to use this tool versus vw_list_layers, vw_list_classes, or vw2d_structure, and no exclusions or prerequisites.

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