mesh_select_all

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state what is selected, whether the selection replaces or extends the current selection, any side effects, or the return value. There is zero behavioral detail beyond the action list.

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 short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. It consists only of a list of action keywords with no explanatory context. It fails to convey the tool's core function, making it unusable for an agent.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description provides almost no context. It lacks any mention of what objects are affected, how selection changes, what the response contains, or any prerequisites. An agent would not know when or how to call this tool correctly.

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 no enum, so the description is the only place listing possible values for 'action'. However, it merely lists the words without explaining what each action means (e.g., what TOGGLE does versus INVERT). The default value is not discussed. It adds minimal value over the schema's property name.

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 lists possible action values (SELECT, DESELECT, TOGGLE, INVERT) but never states what the tool actually does. The tool name suggests selecting all mesh elements, but the description does not explicitly convey that it performs a selection operation on all meshes. It is vague and relies on the name for meaning.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like get_selection, set_selection, and frame_selected exist, but there is no mention of differentiating factors, prerequisites, or typical usage scenarios.

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