sculpt_extract

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

Description explains parameters and method-specific behaviors but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether original mesh is modified, if scene structure changes, or required mode). Since no annotations exist, description carries full burden but is only partially complete.

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?

Structured with a clear purpose sentence followed by bullet lists for method options and parameter descriptions. Front-loaded and concise without redundancy, though could be slightly more compact.

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 complexity (6 parameters, nested param structures) and presence of an output schema, the description is fairly complete. Explains all methods and their specific param requirements, but could mention the return value (new object name) or scene impact.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, description compensates by explaining each parameter (method, thickness, offset, smooth_iterations) and providing usage examples for params field (by_face_set and by_position). Adds significant value beyond the raw schema.

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 it extracts part of a sculpted mesh as a new object and lists four extraction methods. It distinguishes itself from potentially overlapping sibling tools like sculpt_extract_face_set by covering broader extraction methods.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., sculpt_extract_face_set). Does not provide context for choosing between methods or prerequisites.

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