blender_polyhaven_search

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a non-mutating external search and the free asset types, but it does not disclose that the tool likely only returns results and does not download or import assets, nor does it mention network requirements or response behavior. This is a significant transparency gap for an unannotated 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 a single sentence that front-loads the action and resource while including the searchable asset categories. There is no filler, repetition of schema details for its own sake, or unnecessary elaboration.

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 search tool with no output schema and a closely related download sibling, the description should clarify that the tool returns search results and that a separate download action is needed to obtain assets. This workflow is left implicit, and the absence of annotations increases the need for that context.

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 three parameters sufficiently. The description restates the asset_type values in prose ('HDRIs, textures, or 3D models') but adds no additional semantic meaning for 'query' or 'categories' beyond what the input schema provides.

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 names a specific action ('Search') and a specific resource ('Poly Haven'), and enumerates the asset categories searched: HDRIs, textures, or 3D models. This makes the core purpose clear and broadly distinguishes it from the download sibling, though it does not explicitly contrast it with any alternative.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not say when to prefer this tool over blender_polyhaven_download, nor does it mention that search results still require a separate download step. The intended workflow is only implied by the verb 'Search'.

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