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

The description discloses key behavioral aspects: it returns direct CDN URLs (CORS *, immutable) that can be loaded with a GLTFLoader, and it states that licence metadata is retained in results. This goes beyond simple read-only semantics, but it does not mention pagination behavior or default sorting nuances.

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 reasonably concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. The additional sentences about CDN URLs, licenses, and metadata add context without excessive verbosity, though it could be slightly tighter without losing value.

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 search tool with no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: it explains what is searched, what is returned (CDN URLs), and the license implications. It lacks details about result structure or sorting options, but overall it gives enough for an agent to understand the tool's role.

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 description clarifies the meaning of the main search parameters (query, category, theme, style) and ties them to user-facing concepts. However, it does not add information about the page or limit parameters, which lack descriptions in the schema, so not all parameter semantics are covered.

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's function: searching the free GLB catalogue on 3dassets.dev, with explicit mention of the search dimensions (text, category, theme, style) and the output (CDN URLs). It distinguishes this from pack-level searches by focusing on individual GLB assets.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_packs or list_tags. It implies it is the tool for searching individual assets, but offers no explicit conditions or criteria for tool selection.

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