add_modifier

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 only says 'Add a modifier to an object' and lists types, without mentioning that this mutates the object's modifier stack, whether the operation is reversible, error conditions, or any side effects.

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 concise sentence followed by a useful list of common types. It is front-loaded with the core action and contains no filler, with every element adding value.

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?

This is a 3-parameter tool with 0% schema coverage and no annotations, so the description must compensate. It does not explain parameter semantics, behavior, or prerequisites. While an output schema exists, the missing parameter and behavioral context leaves the definition incomplete for reliable invocation.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It lists common values for the 'type' parameter but does not clarify that 'object' is the target object or that 'name' is an optional custom modifier name. Two of three parameters remain semantically unexplained.

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 ('Add'), resource ('modifier'), and target ('object'), making the tool's function immediately clear. Listing common modifier types (SUBSURF, BOOLEAN, etc.) further disambiguates it from siblings like remove_modifier, list_modifiers, and set_modifier_property.

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 the use case: adding a modifier to an object. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as add_geonodes_modifier, nor does it mention prerequisites like object existence or valid modifier types.

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