モデル生成

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

The description clearly states the GPU load, frame-boundary processing, synchronous return behavior, and idempotency support, adding significant context beyond the sparse annotations (only title and openWorldHint).

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, front-loading the main purpose, then adding behavioral details, and ending with a key feature. It is concise and well-structured with no unnecessary words.

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 existence of an output schema, the description appropriately mentions the synchronous return of entityId, name, sceneGeneration. It lacks error handling or prerequisites but is sufficient for a model loading tool.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all parameters, so the description does not need to add much. It reinforces the idempotency_key usage but does not introduce new meanings beyond the schema.

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 specifies generating models from specific file types (.gltf/.glb/.fbx/.obj) using an assets relative path, clearly distinguishing it from other spawn tools that create primitives or prefabs.

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 provides some guidance on retry handling via idempotency_key but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like dx12_spawn_prefab or dx12_spawn_box, leaving the agent to infer when to use this tool over others.

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