sculpt_mesh_filter

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It lists parameters but does not disclose critical behavioral traits like effect on mesh (e.g., permanent modification), required topology, or mode requirements.

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?

Short and to the point, with bulleted parameter list. No unnecessary fluff, though a brief behavioral note would improve completeness without adding length.

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 basic parameter meanings and mentions 'no stroke needed', but lacks behavioral context (e.g., what happens to mesh, return value) despite having an output schema not referenced.

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?

Adds some meaning beyond schema (e.g., strength 'can be >1.0', iterations as passes, axes selection). However, key parameter 'mesh_name' and filter_type options lack explanation of impact.

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 'Apply whole-mesh sculpt filter (no stroke needed)', specifying verb, resource, and scope. Lists filter types, distinguishing it from stroke-based siblings like sculpt_brush_stroke.

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?

Implicitly suggests use for whole-mesh effects without strokes, but no explicit comparison to alternative tools (e.g., sculpt_brush_full) or 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.