uv_smart_unwrap

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It reveals the algorithm is angle-based but does not disclose important traits such as whether it modifies existing UVs, requires edit mode, or has limitations. Insufficient for an agent to fully understand the behavior.

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 brief (3 lines plus parameter list) and well-structured. Every sentence adds value. The parameter block is clear and easy to parse. No wasted words, 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?

Covers purpose and parameters adequately but misses higher-level context: return value (none implied), side effects (UV map modification), prerequisites (mesh must have faces?). With no output schema, more guidance on expected outcome would be helpful.

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?

The schema lacks descriptions, but the tool description provides human-readable explanations for all four parameters (object_name, angle_limit, island_margin, area_weight) including defaults and units. Adds meaningful context beyond the schema fields.

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?

Clearly states it performs automatic UV unwrapping using 'Smart UV Project' based on face angles. Provides intended use cases (hard-surface models, mechanical parts, props). However, it does not differentiate from sibling UV tools like smart_uv_project or uv_unwrap.

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?

Suggests when to use (good for hard-surface models) but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. No comparison with other UV unwrapping methods provided.

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