extrude_faces

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry full burden. It only states basic function but does not disclose that it modifies the mesh destructively, requires edit mode, or what happens to non-mesh objects. Agent lacks behavioral context.

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?

Description is extremely concise, front-loading the action in one sentence, followed by brief arg and return specs. No fluff, every sentence is necessary.

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?

Tool modifies geometry but description lacks crucial context: which mode it operates in (edit mode?), selection requirements (all faces implies none selected?), undo behavior, and whether it works on any object type. Output schema exists but is trivial ('Confirmation dict'), so not informative.

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 description adds basic semantics: object_name is the mesh name, offset is distance along normals. However, it omits constraints like valid range for offset or required object type beyond name.

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 clearly states the tool extrudes all faces of a mesh along normals. Verb 'extrude' and resource 'faces' are specific and distinct from sibling tools like bevel_edges or inset_faces.

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. Missing prerequisites (e.g., mesh must be in edit mode) and no differentiation from other extrusion or face operations.

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