stylize

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the async behavior and references the polling and retrieval workflow. No contradictions, but lacks details on side effects or authentication needs.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose and then provides async workflow guidance. It is concise and to the point, though it could be slightly more structured.

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 async nature, multiple styles, and optional parameter, the description adequately covers purpose, flow, and linkages to sibling tools. An output schema exists but is not provided, but the description still offers sufficient context.

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 baseline 3. Description repeats the style parameter values and mentions blockSize as optional, but doesn't add significant meaning beyond the schema definitions.

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 the tool applies a stylization effect to a 3D model, listing specific styles (lego, voxel, voronoi, minecraft). It distinguishes itself from siblings by emphasizing it's an async operation and directing to task_status and download_model.

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 explicitly says it's an async operation and instructs the agent to poll progress with task_status and retrieve results with download_model. While it doesn't provide when-not-to-use or alternatives, it gives clear context for correct usage.

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