BlenderMCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the tool captures a screenshot and returns it as an Image, but lacks details on permissions needed, whether it affects Blender state, error conditions, or rate limits. It adds basic behavioral context but misses important operational traits for a capture tool.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by a concise parameter explanation and return statement. Every sentence adds value with zero waste, making it efficiently structured and appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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 the tool's low complexity (1 optional parameter) and no output schema, the description is moderately complete but lacks details on the Image return format (e.g., dimensions, encoding) and potential side effects in Blender. It covers basics but leaves gaps for operational use.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the single parameter's purpose ('Maximum size in pixels for the largest dimension') and provides the default value (800), adding meaningful semantics beyond the schema's title and type. However, it doesn't clarify constraints like minimum/maximum values or units beyond 'pixels'.

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 clearly states the specific action ('Capture a screenshot') and target resource ('current Blender 3D viewport'), distinguishing it from all sibling tools which involve downloading assets, executing code, getting status/info, searching, importing, or setting textures. No other tool mentions viewport or screenshot functionality.

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 when a viewport screenshot is needed, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (none exist among siblings), nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The context is clear but lacks comparative or conditional guidance.

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