mirror_mesh_model

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It accurately describes core behavior: mirroring, normal preservation, default output behavior (overwrites input). Could mention file overwrite warning or error handling, but sufficient for a simple operation.

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?

Concise: two paragraphs, first states purpose, second details parameters. No wasted sentences. Could be slightly more streamlined but effective.

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, description says returns dict with mirror info, which is acceptable. For a single-function mesh tool, covers operation, parameters, and return type adequately. Could mention error cases but not critical.

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 schema description coverage 0%, description adds meaning for all 3 params: file_path required, axis with default 'x', output_path defaults to overwriting input. Clarifies the axis options and output behavior.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'mirror' and resource 'mesh model', explains the operation (negating coordinates, reversing winding order). Clearly distinguishes from siblings like scale, rotate, boolean ops.

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?

States clear purpose but does not explicitly say when to use vs alternatives. However, mirroring is a very specific operation so implied usage is clear. No exclusions or when-not provided.

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