meshy_plan_multiview

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint; the description adds material behavioral context by explaining this is a dry-run validation with redacted request preview and no paid task. This is consistent with the annotations and goes beyond what they express.

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 short, purposeful sentences with the core action front-loaded and the safety/cost qualifier clearly separated. Every word contributes useful information; there is no redundancy or filler.

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 read-only, idempotent planning tool with an output schema, this description covers the essential behavior needed to invoke it safely. Minor gaps remain around exact validation rules and the optional texture_prompt, but the critical 'no paid task' boundary is explicit.

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 description clarifies that the four view parameters represent image paths or HTTPS URLs, which adds meaning beyond the plain string types in the schema. However, output_dir and texture_prompt are left unexplained, and with 0% schema description coverage this only partially compensates for missing parameter documentation.

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 states a specific action (validate), a specific resource (four image paths/HTTPS URLs), and a preview behavior. The explicit boundary 'No paid task is submitted' clearly distinguishes it from paid submission siblings like meshy_start_multiview.

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 clearly conveys a validation/preview context and explicitly signals that no paid submission occurs, which helps an agent decide when to use it. It does not explicitly name alternatives or provide when-not conditions, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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