apply_material_to_all

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention side effects (e.g., replacing existing materials), ordering, whether it operates on the current selection, or any limitations. This is entirely absent.

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 extremely brief—a single sentence—which is under-specification rather than conciseness. It lacks structure and does not front-load essential constraints or usage notes. While it avoids fluff, it fails to provide needed detail.

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 tool with two parameters, no annotations, and an output schema that is not described, this description is grossly incomplete. It omits how objects are selected, what happens when object_names is null, and any return or error behavior. An agent cannot call this tool reliably.

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 schema has two parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description adds no explanation of object_names (a possibly optional list) or material_name. Without any elaboration, an agent cannot infer how to populate these parameters correctly.

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 clear verb ('apply') and resource ('material to objects'), but it does not specify which objects are affected (e.g., selected, all, or a list). The tool name implies 'to all', but the description leaves this ambiguous, and it does not distinguish from the sibling assign_material, which likely handles per-object assignment.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like assign_material or set_material_slot. No context is provided about selection requirements, object scope, or when this approach is preferred.

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