Run Mesh Boolean

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

Annotations provide no hints about destructiveness or side effects. The description adds no behavioral details, such as whether the input meshes are modified, prerequisites like closed manifold, or output behavior.

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?

A single sentence of 12 words that is front-loaded with the main action. Every word earns its place; no redundancy or 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?

Despite the presence of an output schema, the description lacks key contextual information: whether it modifies existing geometry or creates new objects, required mesh conditions (e.g., closed, intersecting), and typical use cases. This is inadequate for a modeling tool among many siblings.

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 100%, so the schema already describes each parameter fully. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, resulting in baseline score.

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 verb 'Perform' and the resource 'boolean operation on two meshes', and lists the three operations. It distinguishes from sibling modeling tools like combine or bevel, though it doesn't clarify if the result is a new mesh or modifies the input.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like modeling.combine or modeling.separate. No when-not-to-use or context cues provided.

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