find_duplicates

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it does not state whether the tool selects duplicates, returns a list, highlights them, or modifies the mesh. It also does not mention whether the object must be in edit mode or what the output format is.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a clean parameter list. Every sentence contributes useful information and there is no redundant or filler content.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete. An agent can identify the parameters but cannot predict what the tool returns or how the result is presented, which is essential for using the tool correctly in a workflow.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides basic definitions for both parameters ('Target object' and 'Distance threshold for duplicate detection'), but it does not explain units, valid ranges, or the exact meaning of a 'duplicate' beyond the threshold.

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 states a specific verb ('Find'), a specific resource ('duplicate vertices'), and a precise condition ('within a distance threshold'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like merge_vertices or smooth_vertices, which perform different operations on the same kind of geometry.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as merge_vertices or analyze_mesh_quality. There is no mention of prerequisites, intended workflow context, or cases where a different tool would be more appropriate.

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