download_polyhaven_asset

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it downloads and imports but doesn't explain side effects like where the asset is saved, whether it modifies the Blender scene permanently, error conditions, or whether network access is required. Returns 'a message' but without detail.

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 well-structured and not overly long. The parameter list is somewhat redundant with the schema, but since the schema has no descriptions, it serves a purpose. Each sentence contributes to understanding the tool.

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?

The description omits important context: no output schema, no error handling, no relationship to other tools, no mention of pipeline prerequisites. It leaves questions about what 'import' entails and what the success/failure message looks like, making it incomplete for a 5-parameter tool.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description lists all parameters and provides useful examples (e.g., asset_type 'hdris, textures, models'; file_format examples per type). However, it lacks deeper semantics like how to format asset_id or what happens with defaults, so it only partially compensates for the schema's missing descriptions.

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 tool's function: 'Download and import a Polyhaven asset into Blender.' This is specific and distinguishes it from siblings like search_polyhaven_assets or download_sketchfab_model, which have different purposes.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites like having an asset_id from a search, nor does it reference sibling tools. The intended usage context must be inferred from the name.

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