measure_angle

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and does not reveal whether the operation is read-only, has prerequisites, or could modify the session. This lack of transparency is a gap for a tool that the agent must safely invoke.

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 sentence that is front-loaded and contains no redundant words. Every element ('measure angle', 'degrees', 'three single-atom selections') delivers essential information efficiently.

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 tool with full schema coverage, an output schema, and clear purpose, the description is largely complete. It lacks usage exclusions or prerequisite information, but given the simplicity and existing schema, it is sufficiently informative for a low-complexity tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, with each parameter described as a single-atom selection (atom2 specifically as 'Vertex'). The description adds no further semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Measure') and resource ('angle') with explicit scope ('defined by three single-atom selections'). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like measure_distance and measure_dihedral, which measure different geometric properties.

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 implies usage (measure angles when needed) but provides no explicit when/when-not guidance or alternatives. It does not differentiate from siblings beyond the inherent purpose, leaving the agent to infer context from the tool name and description.

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