Run Mesh Boolean

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description does not clarify whether the original meshes are modified or if a new mesh is created. Boolean operations can be destructive or non-destructive; this lack of detail limits agent understanding of side effects.

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?

Single sentence with 12 words, contains all essential information without redundancy. Efficiently communicates core functionality.

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?

Output schema exists but is not provided; however, context signals confirm its presence. Description omits details about return type (e.g., new mesh) and whether original meshes are preserved. Adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all parameters ('First mesh (base)', 'Second mesh (operand)', 'Boolean operation type'). Description adds no additional semantic value beyond listing operations. Baseline 3 as schema covers the meaning.

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?

Description explicitly states the verb 'perform', resource 'boolean operation', and lists the three operations (union, difference, intersection). Clearly distinguishes from sibling modeling tools like bevel, bridge, etc.

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?

Description implies use for boolean operations on meshes but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., combine vs union, difference vs separate). No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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