multiview_to_3d

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the operation is asynchronous and instructs to use task_status for polling and download_model to retrieve results. This adds key behavioral context beyond the input schema.

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 three sentences with no wasted words. First sentence states purpose, second gives critical input order constraint, third explains async workflow. Each sentence earns its place.

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 (20 parameters, async, result retrieval), the description covers core purpose, input constraints, and workflow. It does not detail optional parameters or output schema, but those are covered by schema and output schema. Slightly more context on follow-up steps would elevate it to a 5.

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% with detailed descriptions for all 20 parameters. The description reinforces the image order constraint for imageUrls/imagePaths but adds no additional meaning beyond that. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 generates a 3D model from 2-4 ordered reference images. It specifies the required view order (front, left, back, right) and distinguishes from siblings like image_to_3d or image_to_multiview by emphasizing the ordered multiview input.

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 implies usage when 2-4 ordered images are available, but does not explicitly mention when not to use it (e.g., when a single image suffices, use image_to_3d). No alternatives are named, though the sibling tool list provides context.

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