blender_mcp_edit_model

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'send instructions' but does not explain whether the STL is modified, if Blender must be installed, what side effects occur, or what the bridge command does. This is insufficient for a tool that likely executes external processes.

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?

Single sentence of 14 words, front-loaded with purpose. No redundant or extraneous content. Efficiently communicates the essence.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should provide more context about return values, error handling, prerequisites, and external dependencies. It is incomplete for a tool that bridges to another application.

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 parameters are already well-described structurally. The description adds no additional meaning beyond 'advanced model edits', not even hinting at the order of operations or relationship between parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 sends STL-edit instructions to a Blender MCP bridge for advanced model edits. It uses a specific verb ('Send') and resource ('STL-edit instructions') and distinguishes from simpler sibling tools like rotate_stl or scale_stl by emphasizing 'advanced model edits'.

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 vs alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention that simple edits might be better handled by sibling tools like scale_stl or rotate_stl, nor does it explain prerequisites (e.g., Blender or bridge running).

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