import_generated_asset_hunyuan

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden. It states the return behavior ('Return if the asset has been imported successfully') and the prerequisite, but lacks details on side effects, failure handling, or permission requirements. Some context is added, but not comprehensive for an import operation.

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: a one-line purpose, a structured parameter list, and a return note. No unnecessary words or repetition. Well organized and front-loaded.

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 simple 2-parameter tool, the description covers the basics: purpose, trigger condition, parameter meanings, and return value. However, it omits guidance on error conditions or integration with polling tools (e.g., get_hunyuan3d_status) to ensure the generation task is actually done. Given no annotations or output schema, this is a notable gap.

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 schema provides only types with no descriptions (0% coverage). The description compensates by explaining both params: 'name: The name of the object in scene' and 'zip_file_url: The zip_file_url given in the generate model step.' This adds meaningful context beyond field names.

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's function: 'Import the asset generated by Hunyuan3D after the generation task is completed.' It uses a specific verb ('Import') and resource ('generated asset from Hunyuan3D'), distinguishing it from the sibling 'import_generated_asset' which likely handles other models.

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 clear when-to-use context: 'after the generation task is completed' and references 'the zip_file_url given in the generate model step.' It implicitly links to generate_hunyuan3d_model and poll_hunyuan_job_status, but does not explicitly exclude alternatives like import_generated_asset.

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