vrc_merge_materials

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that it creates a report and can auto-merge identical settings, but does not specify if materials are modified or deleted, nor the content of the report.

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?

Very concise: three sentences plus a parameter list. Information is front-loaded and no words are wasted.

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 existence of an output schema (not shown) and only two simple parameters, the description covers the tool's purpose and key behavior adequately. Lacks some detail on merging effects, but overall sufficient.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining defaults for mesh_name (uses 'Body' or first mesh if empty) and target_count (default 1). Schema has no descriptions, so this compensation is valuable.

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 the tool analyzes and prepares materials for merging to reduce material slot count, and can auto-merge identical materials. This specifies a verb ('analyze and prepare') and resource ('materials for merging'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like material_list or material_assign.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for atlas preparation and merging, but does not mention exclusions or alternatives among siblings.

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