download_polyhaven_asset

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It states the basic action (download and import) and the return value, but omits details like scene modification side effects, network requirements, or potential conflicts. This is adequate but not rich, hence a 3.

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?

The description is efficiently structured: purpose sentence, parameter list, return message. No filler or redundancy.

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?

For a 4-parameter tool with no annotations and no enums, the description provides strong coverage of parameters and return. It could mention prerequisites (e.g., need a valid asset_id from search) but the core operation is fully described.

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 lists all four parameters in detail, including valid asset_type values, resolution examples, and format suggestions per asset type. Schema coverage is 0%, so this description fully compensates, earning a 5.

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 uses the specific verb phrase 'Download and import' with a clear resource ('Polyhaven asset') and target ('into Blender'), distinguishing it from sibling search/category/status tools and other asset downloaders.

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?

It clearly states the tool's purpose: to download and import a Polyhaven asset. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to siblings, but the context is unambiguous, so it earns a 4 rather than a 3.

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