Change Model Size

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states the tool changes the uniform size, implying a mutation, but does not disclose whether it replaces or modifies the existing size, any side effects, or if it requires specific permissions. The transparency is minimal.

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 that is efficient and front-loaded. It communicates the core purpose without unnecessary words or details.

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 tool has a single parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what happens after the change (e.g., return value, visual update), nor does it specify the allowed range or format of the size value beyond the schema. The presence of sibling 'scale_model' suggests additional context is needed for the agent to choose correctly.

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 input schema is fully covered with 100% description coverage. The parameter 'size' is already described in the schema as 'New size value (uniform scaling)'. The description adds the phrase 'uniform size of the 3D model', which slightly clarifies the scope, but adds little beyond the schema definition.

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 action (change) and resource (uniform size of 3D model), but it does not differentiate from the sibling 'scale_model' tool, which likely performs a similar operation. The verb 'change' is specific enough, but the lack of distinction between tools reduces clarity.

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 like 'scale_model'. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or scenarios where this tool is preferred. This is a significant gap given the presence of a similarly named sibling.

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