l2_export_obj

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., file creation, overwrite behavior) or any permissions/requirements. Exporting is implicitly a write operation but not clarified.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently communicates the core purpose without redundancy. Every word earns its place.

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?

Despite good schema coverage, description lacks details on default behavior, error conditions, file path conventions, or return values. For a tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, more context is needed for completeness.

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 covers 100% of parameters with clear descriptions. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb (Export), resource (generated/imported meshes), and target formats (OBJ/FBX), distinguishing it from sibling tools like l2_import_obj which does the opposite.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Description implies usage for exporting meshes for external editing, but does not mention alternatives or contexts where other export tools might be more appropriate (e.g., l2_export_animation for animations).

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