stream_text_to_3d_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it only discloses that the call streams until completion. It says nothing about what happens on failure, whether the stream can hang, how the timeout parameter terminates it, or what the update payloads look like - all critical for a long-running streaming operation.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; nothing is wasted. Brevity is the issue in other dimensions, not verbosity here.

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 streaming tool with no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter documentation, the description is too thin. An agent cannot tell what updates it receives, how errors surface, or how timeout interacts with completion.

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%, so the description must compensate, and it does not: 'task_id' is only obliquely referenced as 'a text-to-3d task', and the optional 'timeout' parameter is never mentioned at all despite directly controlling how long this stream blocks.

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 plus resource ('Stream updates for a text-to-3d task') and adds scope ('until it completes'). It is distinguishable from retrieve_text_to_3d_task and list_text_to_3d_tasks in practice, but the description never names the alternative, leaving the stream-vs-poll distinction implicit.

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 phrase 'until it completes' implies this is the blocking wait-for-finish option, which gives some usage context. However, it never says when to prefer retrieve_text_to_3d_task over streaming, nor whether it is required before retrieving results.

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