bake_normal_map

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains each parameter and hints at output_path auto-generation, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., file creation, overwriting) or requirements like UV maps.

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 one-paragraph description with bullet-style parameter list. Front-loaded purpose, no wasted words, each sentence adds value.

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?

Covers all parameters with usage hints, but lacks information about output (format, location), error cases, or prerequisites (UV maps, mesh topology). For a tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, more details are needed for completeness.

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 has 0% description coverage, so description compensates by explaining each parameter: high_poly, low_poly, resolution (with recommendation), cage_extrusion (with gap hint), samples, output_path. Adds meaningful context beyond names/types.

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 clearly states 'Bake a normal map from high-poly to low-poly mesh', specifying verb, resource, and process, distinguishing it from sibling bake tools like bake_ao or bake_textures.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus other bake tools (e.g., bake_ao, bake_textures). The purpose is implied, but with multiple sibling bake tools, more explicit context is needed.

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