blender_export_fbx

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the export action but does not mention file overwriting behavior, whether the operation is read-only with respect to the scene, or the defaults for selected_only and apply_modifiers. This leaves significant side-effect ambiguity.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. It contains no redundant words and reads as a clean, efficient summary of the tool's purpose.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description should carry more weight than it does. Missing details about FBX-specific options, default parameter behavior, and side effects leave the agent with incomplete information for a multi-parameter file-export operation.

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 of 3 applies. The phrase 'scene or selected objects' lightly reinforces the selected_only parameter, but the description adds no substantive meaning beyond the schema's existing 'Export selected objects only' and 'Apply modifiers' descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb ('Export') with a clear resource ('scene or selected objects') and target format ('FBX'). It differentiates from sibling exporter tools by explicitly naming the FBX format and the scene/selection scope.

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 when to use this tool: when FBX output is desired. However, it provides no explicit comparison with sibling exporters (gltf, obj, stl, usd) and no guidance on when not to use this format, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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