export_stl

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only mentions exporting to STL for 3D printing. It does not state whether the model must be open, if existing files are overwritten, or any side effects, leaving significant gaps.

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 short with two sentences; the first clearly states the action, and the second provides context. While the second sentence is somewhat redundant, the overall structure is efficient. Front-loading is good.

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 nested schema and existence of an output schema, the description fails to mention prerequisites (e.g., active model), the role of options, or what the output contains. The format_type ambiguity further undermines completeness.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema. Worse, it says 'export to STL' while format_type accepts other formats, creating misleading information that diminishes parameter clarity.

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 tool exports to STL format and explains what STL is, making the purpose specific. However, it does not clarify whether 'current model' means the currently open document or if the file_path is for a new file, and the tool's name and description imply STL-only export, while the schema includes other formats.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like export_step or export_image, nor does it specify criteria like file type or context. The contradiction with the schema (STL-only vs multiple formats) further confuses usage.

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