hollow_mesh_model

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It mentions generating an inner offset shell and outputting a new file, but it does not state whether the original file is modified, any destructive behavior, or permission requirements. The process is described but not the behavioral impact.

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 concise, with the first sentence clearly stating the purpose. The subsequent sentences add necessary detail without unnecessary fluff, though it could be slightly more streamlined.

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 no output schema, the description covers return value (dict with stats and material savings) and the general process. However, it could be more complete by noting assumptions (e.g., manifold mesh) or failure modes, but overall, it provides sufficient context for a basic tool.

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 0%, but the description adds meaning for all three parameters: file_path as 'Path to the STL file,' wall_thickness_mm with default and unit, output_path with default template. This goes beyond what the schema provides.

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 starts with 'Create a hollow version of a mesh to save material,' which clearly states the verb and resource. It also briefly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'thicken_mesh_walls' by focusing on hollowing and material savings.

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 usage for saving material but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not mention alternatives like 'thicken_mesh_walls' or prerequisites (e.g., manifold mesh).

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