ifcx_export_preview_threejs

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

With no annotations, the description must cover behavioral traits but only mentions the output. It does not disclose side effects, permissions, or what a 'preview folder' entails.

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 but at the expense of missing essential information. It is front-loaded with purpose but too sparse to be fully effective.

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 two parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain drafts, folder contents, or the relationship between sessionId and the output.

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 explain the parameters 'sessionId' or 'outputDir'. It only hints at 'from the draft' but lacks explicit details.

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 it exports a Three.js preview folder with glTF geometry from the draft, specifying the verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'ifcx_export_preview_gltf' which likely exports just the glTF file.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'ifcx_export_preview_gltf'. No prerequisites or context provided about drafts or sessionId.

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