In which case, it's OK for a developer to ignore YOUR personal preferences and go with something less flexible. You can ruin a project by trying to accommodate multiple workflows. Let me emphasis that - RUIN A PROJECT.
In solvespace, tool use consists of selecting sketch entities and then applying a tool - example: select lines and apply a constraint (parallel, perpendicular, equal), or what I call "noun - verb". Some people want to use "verb - noun" which would mean selecting the operation (verb) first and then the thing to apply it to (nouns) and then some kind of "go" or "ok" to actually do it. Some have even submitted PRs trying to implement the later as an option.
We will not have it. The disruption to the code is too much. Verb-noun introduces state where there was none, which is a maintenance burbern (small but not zero). It requires the extra step to apply the operation. It does not offer additional capability to users.
At some point you end up "refactoring" and "building an API" to enable all this flexibility. And that's maybe OK for commercial software where people are paid to waste countless hours pandering to the whims of large customers. Architecture astronauts like that kind of stuff for its own sake. Keep them away. Refactor when it's necessary to bring new functionality, not when it's just a user preference.
Make an application, not a toolkit for making applications.