Detect missing external file references in a blend file by launching background Blender, then get a summary of unresolved paths to fix broken asset links.
Report missing file references by opening blend_file in background Blender.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| blend_file | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful operational context that the tool runs 'in background Blender', but it does not disclose prerequisites, failure modes, or how missing-file detection behaves.
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 with no filler and front-loads the main action. It is concise, though the brevity leaves room for more useful guidance without becoming bloated.
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 one-parameter, read-only tool, the description covers the core operation, and the output schema can explain the return shape. However, it omits the CLI-vs-non-CLI selection context and any notes about Blender availability or execution environment, leaving meaningful gaps.
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% and the parameter has no property description. The description's use of '*blend_file*' confirms it is a Blender file path, but it does not add details such as path format, required extension, or file accessibility. Compensation for the missing schema text is minimal.
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 action and resource: 'Report missing file references by opening *blend_file*'. This clearly distinguishes it from datablock, library, and path summary siblings. It does not explicitly articulate the CLI-vs-GUI distinction, relying partly on the tool name and title.
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 the non-CLI sibling get_blendfile_summary_missing_files or other summary tools. The description mentions 'background Blender' but does not explain why an agent should choose this variant over the others.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.