blender_create_curve

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

The description adds context beyond annotations by specifying units (meters) and cyclic behavior (closed loops). However, it does not disclose side effects such as creating a new object in the scene or any destructive potential, and annotations are all false, so the description carries more burden but falls short of full disclosure.

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 compact, consisting of three sentences that front-load the action and resource, then provide essential unit and behavioral details without extraneous words.

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 tool with 12 parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but not complete. It clarifies core concepts (units, cyclic) but omits guidance on parameters like fill_mode, bevel_resolution, and semantic_type, and does not mention that the tool creates a new scene object, which an agent might need to know.

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?

With only 25% schema description coverage, the description compensates partially by explaining that bevel_depth is in meters and that cyclic creates closed loops, which the schema does not describe. However, it does not clarify other parameters like fill_mode, curve_type, or bevel_resolution beyond the schema's minimal descriptions, leaving gaps.

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 states a specific action ('Create') and resource ('general 3D polyline or Bezier curve'), and distinguishes it from a logo generator, making its purpose unambiguous. It also implies a distinction from sibling tools like blender_create_primitive without naming them directly.

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 clarifies the tool is for general curves, not logo generation, giving context on appropriate use. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like blender_create_primitive or state when not to use this tool, so guidance is clear but not fully explicit.

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