Extract PBR maps from a GLB

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose meaningful traits: it writes files, produces PNGs, splits the packed metallic-roughness image, and is local-only. It does not mention what happens if images are absent in the GLB, error behavior, or whether any source files are modified.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the core operation followed by the I/O constraint. No filler or redundancy.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should convey return artifacts; it does by naming the extracted images and PNG outputs. Output filenames are partly covered by the schema's default output_dir naming convention, so the remaining gap is minor.

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 100%, so all three parameters are already documented in-schema, establishing a baseline of 3. The description adds only a mention of PNG output format, not parameter-specific meaning 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?

States a specific verb (extract/split) and concrete resources (base color, normal, metallic-roughness maps), plus the output format (PNG). An agent immediately understands the transformation performed. No siblings exist, so differentiation isn't a factor.

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 clause 'Reads and writes local files only' sets a boundary condition that helps an agent know this operates on local disks rather than remote storage. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to invoke it versus other processing steps, and no stated prerequisites (e.g., that the GLB must contain embedded textures).

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