Set object shading mode to flat or auto-angle threshold, enabling gradual transitions across the surface based on the specified angle.
Set shading mode. smooth=True for smooth shading, False for flat. auto_smooth uses angle threshold (radians).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| angle | No | ||
| object | Yes | ||
| smooth | No | ||
| auto_smooth | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0+hardened.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The idempotentHint annotation already communicates that repeated calls are safe, but the description adds no further behavioral context such as side effects, permissions, or object-type constraints. Stating that auto_smooth uses an angle threshold is useful parameter behavior, but it is more parameter semantics than broad behavioral transparency.
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?
Three short sentences, each adding distinct value: the action, the meaning of smooth, and the auto_smooth angle behavior. It is front-loaded and contains no filler.
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 simple property-setter tool this is mostly adequate, especially since an output schema exists. However, it leaves out the relationship between auto_smooth and smooth, whether the target must be a mesh, and how this differs from viewport-level shading. These gaps matter for an agent operating on a 3D scene with many shading-related tools.
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?
With 0% schema description coverage, the description carries the full explanatory burden for parameters. It explains smooth=True/False, auto_smooth behavior, and clarifies that angle is in radians, which the schema does not. It does not describe the object parameter or the exact interaction between smooth and auto_smooth, preventing a 5.
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 identifies the action as setting shading mode and distinguishes smooth, flat, and auto-smooth variants. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling set_viewport_shading, but 'smooth shading' and the required object parameter make the mesh-oriented intent reasonably clear.
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 guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_viewport_shading. The description explains how to set the mode but not when the tool is appropriate, what prerequisites exist, or what should be used instead in related scenarios.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.