download_polyhaven_asset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states it imports into the current scene (implying mutation), but doesn't disclose network requirements, potential overwriting, link vs append behavior, or what happens to existing objects. For a download tool that modifies the scene, this is a significant transparency gap.

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 single sentence is extremely short and front-loaded with the core purpose, which is positive. However, it is under-specified rather than efficiently concise, as it omits all parameter and behavioral detail that the tool requires. It earns its place for purpose but not for guidance.

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?

With three parameters (two required), no annotations, and an output schema that is not described, the description is incomplete for an agent to call this tool correctly. It fails to explain what values asset_type accepts, what resolution options exist, or what the import result is. The tool is complex enough that such minimal text is inadequate.

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%, so the description must explain the parameters, but it doesn't mention any. asset_id, asset_type, and resolution are left undefined; even the meaning of asset_type (e.g., hdri, texture, model) is not hinted at. The description adds no value beyond the schema property names.

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 uses a specific verb phrase ('download and import') with a clear resource ('Poly Haven asset') and target ('current Blender scene'). It distinguishes from siblings like search_polyhaven_assets (search) and download_sketchfab_model (different source) by naming the exact asset source and action.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention that this is the step after searching Poly Haven assets, nor contrasts with downloading Sketchfab models. Usage context must be inferred from the tool name and sibling list, which is not dependable.

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