meshy_doctor

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and idempotent, and the description adds meaningful behavioral guarantees: it will not expose credentials and will not call the API. This gives an agent confidence about side effects beyond what annotations convey.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the core action, then states two important exclusions. Every clause earns its place, with no 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?

For a parameterless diagnostic tool with an output schema, this description is fully sufficient. It states the purpose, the safety constraints, and the scope, leaving no ambiguity about when to invoke it.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter meaning to explain. The baseline for parameterless tools is 4, and the description appropriately adds no irrelevant parameter details.

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 uses a specific verb ('check') and a clear resource ('local Meshy credentials'), and it also states what it does not do ('exposing them or calling the API'). This cleanly separates it from the other Meshy workflow tools, which involve planning, starting, or downloading tasks.

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 makes the diagnostic intent obvious: verify local credentials are configured as a prerequisite before using API-dependent Meshy tools. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use it, but the zero-parameter, read-only nature makes the context clear.

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