find_objects

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

With readOnlyHint=true already covering the read-only nature, the description adds behavioral context by noting it avoids downloading the entire scene, indicating a lightweight, targeted operation. It doesn't detail edge cases or return behavior, but the output schema partially compensates.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action and includes a valuable use-case hint. No filler or redundancy; every word serves a purpose.

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 the output schema and read-only annotation, the description covers the essential purpose and context (lightweight search, avoid full scene download). It could explicitly mention matching behavior or result limits, but the current level is adequate for a search tool with four optional parameters.

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%, so the description must compensate. It mentions all four parameters in natural language: name, type (MESH, LIGHT, CAMERA), minimum mesh complexity (min_polygons), and material (has_material). This gives meaning beyond the bare schema, though exact semantics (e.g., substring matching) are not fully specified.

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 tool's action ('Busca objetos') and the resource (objetos) along with specific filter criteria (name, type, min mesh complexity, material). It differentiates itself from siblings by adding 'Evita descargar la escena entera', highlighting its lightweight search capability.

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 implies when to use this tool: when you need to find objects by criteria and avoid downloading the full scene. It provides clear context for usage but does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, stopping short of a 5.

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