blender_bake_from_multires

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the baking mode but omits important side effects: writing/overwriting a file at output_path, the requirement for UVs, the need for the object to actually have a multires modifier, and any scene-level mutations. This is a bake operation that writes a texture, so these details matter.

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?

Two compact sentences, no filler, with the core action and map types front-loaded. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and method.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a write-producing bake operation, the description is too thin. It fails to mention prerequisites like UV maps or an existing multires modifier, what happens to an existing file at output_path, or how the bake behaves if the modifier is missing. The description gives the 'what' but not enough of the 'how to call safely'.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no significant parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides; it only restates map_type (normals/displacement) and object context (multires modifier) already present in the schema.

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 verb (bake), the resource (a Multiresolution modifier), the map types (normals/displacement), and the mechanism (multires bake mode transferring detail from higher subdivision levels). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling bake tools like blander_bake_highpoly_to_lowpoly or blander_bake_curvature.

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 provides clear context that this tool is for baking specifically from a Multiresolution modifier using Blender's multires bake mode. It does not explicitly name alternatives or give when/when-not conditions, but the context is specific enough to guide selection among the many bake-related siblings.

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