blender_workflow

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses sequential execution, optional variable passing, stop_on_error behavior, and step conditions (if_result). However, it does not detail error handling when stop_on_error is false or auth/permissions requirements.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections (operations, step format, variable references). Every sentence adds value without redundancy. Front-loaded with purpose statement.

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?

Covers operations, steps, variables, and stop_on_error. Minor gaps: no explanation of return values (though output schema exists), no mention of template lookup failure behavior. Sufficient for a complex macro 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions, but the description adds critical context: step format structure, variable references ($varname, ${varname.field}), and the relationship between steps, template, and params. This goes beyond schema descriptions.

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 defines the tool as a macro/batch executor for multiple Blender operations, listing specific operations (list_templates, get_template, execute) and step format. It distinguishes itself from individual Blender tools like blender_mesh and the sibling agentic_blender_workflow by focusing on sequential batching.

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 implies use for complex multi-step workflows to reduce round-trips, but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. With siblings like agentic_blender_workflow, more contrast would help.

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