download_polyhaven_asset

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It explains that the tool downloads and imports into Blender, and returns a success/failure message. However, it omits details like whether it overwrites existing files, the download location, or what exactly 'import' means (e.g., adds to scene, appends to file). Some behavior is covered, but gaps remain.

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 concise (two sentences plus a bullet-style parameter list) and effectively front-loaded with the purpose. Every sentence serves a purpose. It could be slightly more streamlined, but it is well-structured for quick comprehension.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and the 0% schema coverage, the description provides adequate parameter semantics and return type. However, it misses important context: prerequisites (Blender running, internet), potential side effects (e.g., file system changes), and handling of errors (e.g., invalid asset_id). Additionally, it does not clarify how this tool interacts with siblings like import_generated_asset. Overall, it is functional but not comprehensive.

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?

The description adds substantial meaning beyond the input schema. It explains each parameter: asset_id, asset_type with example values ('hdris, textures, models'), resolution with examples ('1k, 2k, 4k'), and file_format with type-specific examples. This compensates fully for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 clearly states the verb 'Download and import' and the resource 'a Polyhaven asset into Blender.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_polyhaven_assets (search) and get_polyhaven_status (status), as well as other download tools for different sources (e.g., download_sketchfab_model). The purpose is unambiguous.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., search_polyhaven_assets to find assets first, or get_polyhaven_status to check availability). It also does not mention prerequisites such as having Blender open or an active internet connection, nor does it specify when not to use it.

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