measure_angle

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

No annotations provided and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as whether the tool returns a value, modifies the document, or requires selected faces. It is completely opaque.

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 extremely short (4 words) but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. It fails to convey essential information, so it does not earn its place.

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 has 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is woefully incomplete. It does not mention what the tool returns, how to interpret results, or any dependencies.

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?

The description adds no information about parameters beyond the input schema. The schema itself has descriptions for only face_index1 and face_index2, but body1 and body2 are undocumented strings. The description does not clarify their purpose (e.g., body names or IDs).

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 'FreeCAD tool: measure_angle' essentially restates the name, only adding the domain. It does not specify what the tool does (e.g., measure the angle between two bodies or faces). This is a tautology.

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 this tool over siblings like measure_distance or check_interference. No context about prerequisites or intended use case.

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