create_tube

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description carries a lower burden. However, it adds no extraneous behavioral context—does not mention what happens to existing objects, whether it modifies the current selection, or any other side effects. It merely restates that it creates a tube.

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?

Two short sentences (bilingual) with no filler. The essential information—purpose and key parameter identities—is front-loaded and efficiently presented.

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?

With 23 parameters, the description highlights radius1/radius2 and mentions 'caps and sides' but does not name the specific parameters (capSegs, sides). It also omits generic parameters like name, position, and segments, which an agent might need. While the schema covers each parameter, the description does not help navigate the large parameter set relevant to a tube.

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?

Schema descriptions are 100% covered, but the description adds value by clarifying that radius1 is the outer radius and radius2 is the inner radius—a distinction not explicit in the schema, which only calls them 'first' and 'second'. This mapping helps avoid misuse.

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 it creates a tube and explicitly identifies radius1 as outer and radius2 as inner, which immediately distinguishes it from other create_* tools (e.g., create_cylinder, create_torus). The verb+resource is specific and unambiguous.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or other create_* tools, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone.

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