axis_list_capabilitiesList all AXIS Foundry capabilities (input formats, export platforms, validation rules). [Free — no payment required.]
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| kind | No | Filter by capability kind |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and description adds a cost disclosure (free) and enumerates content; no contradiction. Adds value beyond annotations.
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?
Single front-loaded sentence, every element earns its place; the free note is relevant behavioral info and does not add fluff.
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?
Tool is simple with one optional parameter; description covers purpose and content sufficiently, though no output schema means no explicit return format, but adequate given simplicity.
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 has 100% coverage with enum and property description; description reinforces the enum values in parentheses but adds no new syntax or format details, so baseline 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?
Description uses specific verb 'List' and identifies resource 'AXIS Foundry capabilities' with explicit categories (input formats, export platforms, validation rules), clearly distinguishing from sibling tools that perform operations.
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?
Description implies use when needing an overview of supported capabilities, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use; clear context from 'List all' with no exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool occupies a clearly distinct role: generation (image/text) plus status polling, pipeline processing (file vs inline), validation, repair, export, compliance, manifest verification, inspection, comparison, capabilities, and animation retargeting are all separated. The only potential overlap between axis_process and post_process_mesh is explicitly resolved by input method and scope.
Two naming styles coexist: axis_* prefix for core pipeline/contract tools and descriptive non-prefixed names for generation, repair, and compliance tools. Within axis_*, the verb/noun order is inconsistent (e.g., axis_manifest_verify vs axis_list_capabilities), making the set readable but not uniform.
14 tools is squarely within the ideal 3-15 range and matches the broad but well-defined scope of a full avatar foundry: generation, processing, validation, repair, export, compliance, and metadata inspection. Every tool serves a necessary function with no redundancy or bloat.
The toolset covers the full lifecycle from generation (image/text) and status polling through post-processing, repair, validation, export, and Roblox-specific compliance. Minor gaps exist, such as no tool to list available animation clips (retarget_animation references 'built-in' clips) or manage a library of previously generated avatars, but core workflows are fully supported.