gcode_estimate_time

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only states the mechanism (from feedrates and distances) and output format, but fails to disclose error handling, assumptions (e.g., valid G-code), or any potential limitations (e.g., complex toolpaths).

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 plus output format note, with no redundant information. Every word earns its place.

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 the availability of an output schema, the description still lacks completeness: no clarification for the parameter, no error scenarios, and no mention of prerequisites. The minimal information is insufficient for a tool with one required parameter.

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 single parameter 'file_path_or_code' has no description in the schema (0% coverage) and the tool description does not explain it. The agent cannot infer whether it expects a file path, inline G-code, or what format is acceptable.

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 estimates machining cycle time from G-code feedrates and distances, and specifies the output format (HH:MM:SS). This distinctly differentiates it from sibling tools which handle listing, translating, or running G-code.

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 (e.g., gcode_safety_check or gcode_translate). There are no exclusions or contextual hints about prerequisites or appropriate scenarios.

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