lunaar_model_to_ar

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

Discloses cost (5 credits) and synchronous behavior. With no annotations, description carries full burden; it lacks details on destructive actions, auth requirements, rate limits, or file constraints, but provides some useful behavioral info.

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?

Two sentences are concise and front-loaded with key info. Each sentence adds value, though structure could be improved with bullet points for clarity.

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?

Given 4 parameters (2 required) and no output schema, the description does not cover return details (e.g., URL format), file size limits, processing time, or error conditions. Incomplete for an upload/conversion tool.

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 0% so description must explain parameters. It only mentions 'GLB' and optional 'USDZ + thumbnail', without describing the required 'title' or how 'glbFilePath' is used (e.g., it's a path to an existing file). Inadequate parameter guidance.

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?

Clearly states 'Upload an existing GLB ... get a public AR-viewer URL', specifying the action and outcome. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like lunaar_image_to_3d (which creates 3D models from images) or other tryon tools, so purpose is clear but sibling distinction is implicit.

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?

Mentions credits per call and sync return, giving basic usage context. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use, and no alternatives listed among siblings, so guidance is minimal.

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