blender_boolean_op

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions optional apply and hide behavior, but does not disclose that this is a destructive/modifying operation on the target object, whether apply=false leaves a live modifier, or what happens if the objects do not intersect. This is a meaningful transparency gap for a mutation tool.

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 two sentences with no filler. The core action and operation types are front-loaded, and the optional behaviors appear second. Every sentence contributes useful information.

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 6-parameter mutating tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate but not complete. It covers the main action and optional behaviors, but leaves out usage guidance, prerequisites, failure implications, and the non-destructive modifier behavior when apply is false.

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 schema already documents all six parameters including defaults and solver differences. The description adds only light framing by clarifying that target and tool are the two objects involved, but does not provide any meaning beyond 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 states a specific verb ('Perform') and resource ('boolean operation between two objects'), and lists the three operation types. The 'single call' phrasing also distinguishes it from more manual modifier workflows available in siblings like blender_modifier_add and blender_modifier_apply.

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 usage through the phrase 'in a single call', which suggests this is the direct one-shot path rather than a multi-step modifier workflow. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over modifier-based tools, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites such as both objects existing.

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