Import 3D model

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

Annotations provide minimal behavioral hints (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true). The description adds valuable context: the tool builds a network including specific nodes, falls back to a default primitive if model_path is omitted, and exposes knobs for rotation, zoom, and scale. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Three concise sentences, each providing essential information: the core action, fallback behavior, and comparison to sibling. No redundant or extraneous content.

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 tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the network structure, fallback, and exposed controls. However, it could explicitly state what the tool returns (e.g., the path to the created network) or mention any side effects on the TouchDesigner scene.

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 83% (5 of 6 parameters described). The description adds context beyond the schema by explaining how model_path is used (fed into File In SOP, fallback behavior) and that the knobs are exposed as live controls. It does not repeat schema descriptions but enriches 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 specifies the exact action (import a 3D model file), supported formats (.obj/.fbx/.usd), and the resulting network structure (File In SOP, Geometry COMP, Camera, Light, Render TOP). It clearly distinguishes itself as the imported-model sibling of create_3d_scene, providing strong differentiation.

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 explicitly references create_3d_scene as a sibling tool, implying when to use import_model (for importing existing models) versus creating scenes from scratch. However, it does not elaborate on other alternatives or explicitly state when not to use this tool.

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