blender_object_select

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

Annotations already indicate non-read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent behavior. Description adds that selection can be done by name or wildcard, but does not elaborate on side effects (e.g., clearing previous selection) beyond what is in the schema parameters.

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 short but includes boilerplate 'Args:' and 'Returns:' lines that do not provide useful information beyond the parameter names. Could be more efficient by removing these boilerplate lines.

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 simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It lacks mention of the active scene context or any preconditions, but these are either inferred or covered by the annotations.

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 descriptions already document each parameter (names, pattern, set_active, deselect_all) with clear meaning. The description only says 'params: Selection parameters' which adds no value beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Select objects' with the ability to use name list or wildcard pattern, which is a specific verb+resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like blender_object_list (which likely lists without selecting) and blender_object_create (which creates new objects).

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as blender_object_list or blender_object_activate. No mention of prerequisites or context for use.

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