io-prepare_asset

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral disclosure burden. It states 'apply transforms' and 'export', but does not disclose that the tool writes or overwrites an output file, whether the object is permanently modified, or how formats are handled. This leaves important side effects unstated.

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 one sentence, front-loaded, and free of waste. It efficiently conveys the main action without filler, which is appropriate for its length.

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?

Given 6 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is under-specified. It does not explain formats, path, y_up, or how transforms interplay with the export. The description provides insufficient context for a correct invocation.

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, but it only loosely relates to 'apply_transforms'. It omits the meanings of fundamental parameters such as object, path, format, y_up, and apply_modifiers, leaving a material gap in parameter understanding.

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 identifies the operation: optionally apply transforms to one object, then export that object. The phrase 'just that object' differentiates it from broader sibling tools like io-export, and the intent is specific and understandable.

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 use case, exporting a single object after transforms, but provides no explicit when-to-use guidance or exclusion relative to sibling tools. It doesn't name io-export as an alternative for whole-scene exports, so the guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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