Resize 3D Model to Real-World Dimensions

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

Annotations are non-committal (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=true), so extra context matters. The description adds real value: a 1-credit cost, the exactly-one-of constraint, and that downstream tasks inherit the new size. It stops short of saying whether a model can be resized repeatedly or how it affects existing derived tasks.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then cost, then the exclusivity constraint, then the alternative and an example. Every sentence carries distinct information; no filler.

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?

With an output schema present, return-value explanation is rightly omitted, and the cost, exclusivity, and downstream effects are covered. A minor gap remains: no guidance on choosing between resize_height and resize_longest_side when either would apply.

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 coverage is 100%, so the per-field meanings are already documented, setting a baseline of 3. The description adds a genuine cross-parameter rule the schema does not encode -- give exactly one of resize_height, resize_longest_side or auto_size -- plus a worked example showing meters (0.05 for 5 cm).

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?

States a specific verb (rescale) and resource (model to real-world size), and the title reinforces the scope. It implicitly distinguishes itself from meshy_remesh (geometry change) by framing the operation purely as rescaling with preserved aspect ratio.

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?

Explicitly names the cheaper alternative (meshy_download_model with print_ready + print_height_mm) and the condition that selects it. It also states the mutually-exclusive input constraint and the downstream consequence that later tasks like Auto Split use the new size.

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