set_sculpt_brush

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

Annotations only include idempotentHint: true, which the description does not contradict. However, the description does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as whether the brush change affects all objects or only the active one, or whether radius/strength values persist. The list of brushes is helpful but not behaviorally rich.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and efficiently enumerates brush options without wasted words. However, it could be slightly expanded to cover parameter meanings without becoming verbose, so it does not earn a 5.

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 complexity (3 params, 0% schema coverage), the description is incomplete. It omits prerequisites (e.g., being in sculpt mode), optionality of parameters, and any behavioral nuances. It relies on an output schema that is not shown, but that does not excuse the missing contextual guidance.

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 does not compensate. It lists brush values but fails to explain the meaning, units, or effects of 'radius' and 'strength' parameters. It only says 'settings' generically, leaving the agent without critical parameter semantics.

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 'Set the active sculpt brush and settings' with a specific verb and resource. It also enumerates all available brush types (DRAW, CLAY, etc.), which distinguishes it from any sibling tools that affect sculpt mode (e.g., enter_sculpt_mode).

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention that the user must be in sculpt mode first, or whether this tool is appropriate only after entering sculpt mode. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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