fusion_sketch_line

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

Annotations indicate it is not read-only, not idempotent, and not destructive, but the description adds only that it draws a line in mm. It does not disclose whether it requires an existing sketch or creates a new one, or any side effects. With annotations present, a score of 3 is appropriate as the description adds minimal behavioral context.

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 sentence, concise and front-loaded. However, it could briefly mention the optional parameters without significantly increasing length.

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 simplicity and the presence of siblings, the description should note the requirement for an active sketch and the role of the plane and sketch parameters. It is incomplete in providing full context.

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?

Only the coordinates are described with units (mm). The plane and sketch parameters are not mentioned in the description, and the schema has 0% description coverage. Thus, the description adds partial meaning but misses important parameters.

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 defines the action (draw), the resource (single line segment), and the coordinate system with units (mm). It distinguishes from sibling tools like circles and arcs by specifying 'single line segment'.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like fusion_sketch_arc or fusion_sketch_rectangle. It does not mention prerequisites such as an active sketch.

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