Imports .tbmat, MTL, or named texture files into a Marmoset Toolbag 5 scene so you can apply them to materials.
Import a material file (.tbmat, MTL, or named texture files).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | No | ||
| path | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate the tool is not read-only, not destructive, and not open-world, so the safety profile is known. The description adds accepted file formats, but does not clarify whether import creates a new material, updates an existing one, or how duplicates are handled.
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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently names the action, resource, and accepted formats.
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 simple two-parameter import tool with an output schema, the description still leaves key context missing: the role of the optional name parameter and the side-effect semantics of importing a material. It is under-specified for correct invocation beyond a basic file path.
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 0%, so the description must compensate. It implies the required 'path' is a file path via the import/file wording and format list, but it does not document the optional 'name' parameter at all.
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 ('Import') and resource ('material file'), and lists supported formats (.tbmat, MTL, named texture files). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like material_create or scene_import_model, but the action and resource are clear.
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 implies the tool is used when a material file exists, but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternatives such as material_create or material_duplicate. In a large sibling set, the agent must infer the routing decision.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.