Set Mesh Selection

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and explicitly discloses the destructive clear-first behavior, the editable-mesh precondition, and which channels are affected. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema: selection is replaced wholesale, not additive.

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 front-loaded sentences deliver the action, the behavioral caveat, and the read-back workflow with no filler. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The description is complete for a small 3-parameter tool: it states what is modified, the precondition, and how to read the result. It does not cover edge cases like invalid indices or non-editable meshes, but those are minor against the otherwise clear workflow.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description is not obligated to restate parameters, but it adds key semantic context: `indices` form the new selection set after the existing selection of that kind is cleared. It also links `handle` to 'editable mesh' and `kind` to the three channel types, though it does not detail handle reference syntax.

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 ('Replace') on a precise resource (point/polygon/edge BaseSelect on an editable mesh), and the 'cleared first' behavior distinguishes it from broader selection tools like set_selection. The three channel kinds match the schema enum, so an agent can map description to parameters.

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 pairing guidance with `get_mesh` using `include:['selections']` is explicit and establishes a clear workflow for reading the result back. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like `set_selection` or `set_mesh`, so it lacks full when-not coverage.

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