remove_modifier

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

The annotation already declares destructiveHint=true, and the description simply restates the destructive action without adding useful behavioral context. It does not mention permanence, undoability, or what happens to the modifier's effect, which would be valuable beyond the annotation.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word earns its place: the action, the target resource, and the selection key are all present. Nothing extraneous is included.

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 destructive two-parameter tool with no output schema and zero parameter coverage, the description is too thin. It omits the role of object_name entirely and does not address the key decision between removing a modifier and applying it. The destructiveHint annotation helps, but the description alone is not enough for confident correct invocation.

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 only clarifies modifier_name via 'by name.' It does not explain that object_name is the object containing the modifier, nor any naming constraints such as exact match or case sensitivity. The description only partially compensates for the complete lack of parameter documentation in the schema.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Remove a modifier by name.' It clearly communicates the action and target, and the 'by name' qualifier distinguishes it from modifier operations like list, add, or move. It does not explicitly name a sibling alternative, but the remove action is unambiguous.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as apply_modifier, which is a semantically important distinction in Blender: applying a modifier preserves its effect, whereas removing it discards the modification. No exclusions, prerequisites, or suggestions are provided.

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