io_export_fbx

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions defaults and a critical parameter but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether scene is modified, safety, or reversibility), leaving behavioral gaps.

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 well-structured: purpose sentence, defaults line, critical note, then parameter list. It is concise with no redundant information, front-loading key details.

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 most parameters with usage tips, but lacks mention of export process limitations or return behavior. Acceptable given no output schema.

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?

All 8 parameters are explained with context (e.g., 'add_leaf_bones: Add leaf bones (FALSE for VRChat!)', 'axis_forward: Forward axis (-Z for Unity)'), compensating for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 'Export to FBX format (standard for Unity/VRChat/game engines)' specifying the verb 'export' and the resource 'FBX format', distinguishing it from siblings like io_export_gltf and io_export_obj.

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?

Provides specific usage context: 'Default settings are optimized for VRChat/Unity workflow' and a critical note 'add_leaf_bones=False is critical for VRChat', but does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use.

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