inset_faces

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

Without annotations, the description mentions it is a core operation and describes typical use, but lacks details on side effects, prerequisites (e.g., edit mode), or handling of invalid parameters.

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 concise, front-loads the purpose, and uses a clean docstring format without redundant information.

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 3 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema for return value, the description covers purpose, parameters, and return. Minor gaps include not specifying whether all faces or selected faces are affected, or prerequisites like edit mode.

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?

The input schema has no descriptions for parameters, but the description adds docstring-style Args with ranges for thickness and depth, and specifies object_name is for the mesh object, providing meaningful semantics beyond the schema.

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 'inset', the resource 'all faces of a mesh', and the result 'border/frame around each face,' which is distinct from sibling tools like extrude_faces or bevel_edges.

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?

It explains when to use the tool for 'hard-surface modeling, adding detail, panel lines, or preparing faces for extrusion,' but does not explicitly exclude other scenarios or compare with alternatives.

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