import_generated_asset

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns success status and warns about parameter exclusivity, but does not explain side effects (e.g., whether it overwrites existing assets), permission requirements, or behavior on failure. Adds some value but leaves gaps.

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 very concise, front-loaded with the verb and resource, followed by a compact parameter list and a clear conditional warning. Every sentence adds value without fluff.

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 moderate complexity and lack of annotations/output schema, the description covers the essential context: when to use, how to parameterize, and what it returns. It could be improved by explaining what the Hyper3D Rodin modes are or how to know which mode is active, but it is adequately complete for an import tool.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description compensates fully. It explains each parameter: name is the object name in scene, task_uuid for MAIN_SITE, request_id for FAL_AI, and explicitly states to give only one. This is critical meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 imports a Hyper3D Rodin-generated asset after generation completes, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling import_generated_asset_hunyuan by explicitly naming Hyper3D Rodin.

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?

Provides clear context: must be used after the generation task is completed, and instructs to provide either task_uuid or request_id depending on the Hyper3D Rodin mode. Doesn't explicitly name alternatives but implies the Hunyuan sibling via naming, and gives a concrete exclusivity rule.

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