extrude_sketch

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

No annotations provided, and description offers zero behavioral traits. Does not disclose that tool modifies existing body, creates new feature, or requires sketch to be on a plane. Contradicts no annotations but fails completely to inform about side effects or constraints.

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?

Extremely short (1 sentence), but so under-specified that it fails to inform. Not concise in a helpful way; it omits essential information. Would benefit from a brief explanation of the operation.

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 tool complexity (4 parameters, no output schema, CAD operation) and lack of annotations, description is woefully incomplete. No mention of output (e.g., resulting solid), no error conditions, no details on symmetric parameter effect.

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 75%, but descriptions are misleading (sketch_name described as 'Body name'). Description adds no extra meaning beyond schema. Does not clarify that sketch_name refers to the sketch object and body_name is the container. No guidance on length format or symmetric 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?

Description is 'FreeCAD tool: extrude_sketch' – merely restates name and tool source. Doesn't specify verb (e.g., 'extrudes a sketch to create a solid') or resource (e.g., 'given a 2D sketch'). Fails to distinguish from sibling feature tools like revolve_sketch or sweep_sketch.

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?

No guidance on when to use extrusion vs. alternatives (revolve, sweep, etc.). No prerequisites mentioned (e.g., sketch must be fully constrained, must be in a body). Agent gets no context for selection.

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