get_pattern_bounding_box

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool retrieves bounding box dimensions but does not disclose units, coordinate system, return format, or error behavior for invalid indices. Minimal disclosure for a getter with no annotation support.

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 concise and front-loaded, with a clear one-sentence purpose followed by the parameter explanation. Every word earns its place, no fluff.

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?

For a simple getter with one parameter and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. However, it lacks return format details (e.g., width/height as floats, units) and error handling, which could confuse an agent. It's adequate but not comprehensive.

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 schema only defines pattern_index as an integer with no description. The description adds semantic meaning by specifying 'Zero-based index of the pattern piece,' which is valuable. However, it does not elaborate on valid ranges or edge cases, so it's adequate but not exhaustive.

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 states the tool gets the bounding box (width/height) of a pattern piece, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_pattern_info or get_pattern_geometry by focusing on the bounding box, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus other pattern query tools. The description only states what it does, without context on selection criteria or when it's appropriate to call it.

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