download_polyhaven_asset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does mention that the tool imports into Blender and returns a success/failure message, but it does not disclose potential side effects like scene overwrites, network requirements, or whether the operation is reversible.

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 efficiently structured: a two-sentence overview, a compact parameter list, and a return note. Every line adds value and there is no filler or redundant phrasing.

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 4-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the key elements: purpose, all parameters with examples, optionality, and the return type. It lacks exact allowed values and error scenarios, but overall it provides enough context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly in most cases.

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%, but the description compensates by explicitly documenting all four parameters with concrete examples (hdris/textures/models, 1k/2k/4k, hdr/exr/jpg/png/gltf/fbx) and marks file_format as optional. It could enumerate exact allowed values, but it adds substantial meaning beyond the bare 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 opens with a specific verb+resource+destination: 'Download and import a Polyhaven asset into Blender.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling download tools (e.g., download_sketchfab_model) and search tools (e.g., search_polyhaven_assets).

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 is given on when to choose this tool over alternatives, when it is appropriate to use, or what prerequisites exist (e.g., searching first, Blender being open). The description simply states the action without contextual framing.

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