vba_drawing_dimensions

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

With no annotations, the description carries full transparency burden. It only states 'generate VBA' without disclosing what the tool returns (e.g., script string, macro creation), prerequisites (open drawing), or side effects. This is insufficient for behavioral understanding.

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 single sentence is concise and front-loaded, but it omits necessary details for effective use. While there is no wasted text, the brevity reduces utility.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and a terse description, the tool is missing critical context. The agent cannot understand input requirements, return value, or how this relates to sibling tools like add_dimensions or create_drawing_vba.

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 meaning to any of the 7 parameters. Schema description coverage is only 14% (viewName has a description). The tool description does not explain how parameters like entities, position, or tolerance are used, leaving the agent with minimal guidance.

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 generates VBA for adding dimensions to drawings, using a specific verb ('Generate') and resource. It implies code generation, distinguishing from direct dimension tools like add_dimensions, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from similar VBA generation tools like vba_drawing_annotations.

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 alternatives such as add_dimensions or vba_drawing_annotations. The description lacks context about prerequisites or scenarios where VBA generation is appropriate.

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