export_stl

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. It indicates an export to text, but does not explain whether it writes a file, overwrites existing files, requires permissions, or what happens if parameters are omitted.

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 short sentence with no wasted words. However, it is arguably too sparse for a tool with undocumented parameters and many sibling export formats, and 'STL-like text' is imprecise.

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?

The definition lacks annotations, an output schema, and parameter descriptions. For an export tool with two parameters and no structured documentation, the description does not provide enough context to invoke it correctly or understand its side effects.

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%, and the description does not clarify the meaning of the two parameters. It vaguely references 'entities' but says nothing about 'path' or how entity_ids are interpreted.

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 clear verb and resource: export entities to STL-like text. It does not distinguish this tool from sibling export formats such as export_obj or export_3mf, but the core action is understandable.

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 other export tools. The only implied usage comes from the tool name and the word 'STL', with no explicit context or alternatives.

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