feedback.lookdev

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

No annotations are provided, so the description is expected to disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action and return type, but does not mention side effects, prerequisites (e.g., active object, mode), or resource usage.

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 redundancy. Every word adds value, making it appropriately concise for a simple 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 tool involves rendering and returning analytics, yet the description lacks details about the return format, whether it modifies the scene, or if it requires specific viewport settings. Without output schema or annotations, more context is needed.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate, but it adds no nuance beyond parameter titles in the schema. It does not explain how parameters like 'res' or 'count' affect the output or constraints like resolution being square.

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 renders a material-shaded lookdev turntable and returns quality analytics. The verb 'render' and the specific resource 'material-shaded lookdev turntable' distinguish it from siblings like feedback.turntable or feedback.wire_shaded.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the description implies it's for material evaluation, it does not mention when not to use it or how it compares to other feedback tools.

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