execute_script_headless

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

Discloses it runs in a fresh Blender instance via subprocess and captures variable 'result'. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. However, it lacks details on side effects, permissions, or error handling.

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?

Description is front-loaded with purpose, uses bullet points for clarity, and is relatively concise. Slightly repetitive in places but overall efficient.

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 main purpose, execution model, and return value. With no output schema, explaining 'result' capture is good. Lacks error handling details and explicit contrast with similar tools.

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%, requiring description to explain parameters. 'code' is described only as 'Execute Python code directly', and 'timeout' has no description beyond a default of 300. No unit or behavior specified.

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 it executes Python code in Blender headless mode, specifying 'no TCP' and providing use cases. It distinguishes from siblings like execute_code by emphasizing heavy operations and avoiding socket timeouts.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this for heavy operations that timeout over the socket connection' and lists examples. It does not name alternative tools but the context implies when to use this vs others.

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