blender_session

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that stop kills the process, and run_script requires a bridge addon. However, it does not detail side effects (e.g., unsaved changes on stop), behavior on multiple starts, or error handling. Basic but not exhaustive.

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 concise (few sentences) and front-loads the main purpose. The bullet list of operations is clear, though the formatting (inline dashes) could be improved. No extraneous content.

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 an output schema exists, return values are handled elsewhere. The description covers the five operations adequately but lacks details on error conditions, timeouts (though timeout parameter exists), or what happens on concurrent calls. Adequate for a node with moderate complexity.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of 6 parameters with descriptions. The description adds minimal extra meaning, merely listing operations and reusing parameter names. Since schema coverage is high, baseline 3 is appropriate; description does not significantly enhance understanding beyond 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 clearly states the tool manages a Blender GUI session ('Manage a Blender GUI session from the MCP server') and lists specific sub-operations (status, start, stop, run_script, demo). This distinguishes it from sibling tools which focus on specific Blender tasks (e.g., blender_render, blender_mesh) rather than session management.

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 enumerates each operation's use but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., script_execute for running scripts). It includes a prerequisite for run_script (bridge addon) but lacks explicit when-not or comparison with sibling tools.

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