io_export_stl

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It lists parameters but omits any behavioral traits such as whether the export overwrites files, requires specific object types, or affects the scene. The defaults for booleans are implied but not explicitly stated.

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 highly concise: one sentence of purpose followed by a clean bullet-like list of arguments. It is front-loaded with the core function and uses no superfluous words.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description lacks essential context. It does not explain return values (e.g., success/failure), side effects, prerequisites (e.g., active object must be selected for selected_only), error handling, or how the export interacts with the scene (e.g., does apply_modifiers modify the original object?).

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 add meaning. It does so by listing each parameter (filepath, selected_only, apply_modifiers, ascii_format) with brief explanations, such as 'ASCII STL (True) or binary (False, smaller file)'. However, the explanations are minimal and could provide more detail (e.g., path format, modifier behavior).

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 STL format (3D printing)', which specifies the verb 'export' and resource 'STL format', and distinguishes from sibling export tools (e.g., io_export_fbx, io_export_obj) by naming the specific format.

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 like io_export_fbx or io_export_gltf. The description implies it is for 3D printing, but does not explicitly state context or exclusions.

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