create_feature_vba

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

Without annotations, the description hints at a non-destructive code-generation behavior, but does not explicitly state side effects, return type, or whether it modifies the model. This is minimally adequate.

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 brief sentence, which is concise but lacks structure. It provides no formatting or additional details that could aid comprehension.

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?

The tool has no output schema and the description does not specify what the tool returns (likely VBA code). Important contextual details about the generated code's purpose or integration are missing.

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 does not explain any parameters; it only says 'create a specific feature' without referencing featureType or parameters. Schema coverage is 0%, and the description fails to compensate.

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 verb 'generate' and resource 'VBA code to create a specific feature', which aligns with the input schema's featureType enum. It distinguishes from general VBA tools like generate_vba_script by focusing on feature generation.

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 such as create_extrusion or run_vba_macro. It lacks context about whether this generates code for execution or is a utility function.

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