measure_distance

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It fails to explain what the tool does beyond its name—e.g., whether it returns a distance value in a specific unit, creates a measurement object, or updates after geometry changes. No side effects or constraints are mentioned.

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 only three words, which is extremely concise but at the cost of informativeness. It sacrifices clarity for brevity, making it unhelpful. A good description should be concise yet substantive.

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 that this is a measurement tool with no annotations, no output schema, and two parameters, the description is completely insufficient. It does not explain return values, how to interpret results, or any behavioral details. The tool requires significant documentation to be usable by an AI agent.

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 input schema covers both parameters ('body1', 'body2') with clear descriptions ('First body name', 'Second body name'). Since schema coverage is 100%, the description does not need to add much, but it adds no extra context such as units or accepted formats. Score is baseline 3.

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_distance' is essentially a tautology of the tool name. It states it's a FreeCAD tool but does not specify what 'measure_distance' actually measures (e.g., minimum distance, center distance). It lacks specificity to distinguish it from siblings like 'measure_angle' or 'check_interference'.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'measure_angle' or 'check_interference'. There is no mention of prerequisites, selection requirements, or context for appropriate use.

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