3D-MCP

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. 'Delete multiple Edges' implies a destructive mutation, but it doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits: whether deletion is permanent/undoable, what permissions are needed, if there are rate limits, or what happens to connected geometry. This is inadequate for a destructive 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 extremely concise at three words with zero wasted language. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource. Every word earns its place, though this conciseness comes at the cost of completeness.

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 destructive deletion tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'Edges' are, the consequences of deletion, error conditions, or return values. Given the complexity of 3D modeling operations and lack of structured data, this leaves critical gaps.

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 100% with one parameter 'ids' documented as 'Edge identifiers to delete'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. With 0 parameters requiring extra explanation, the baseline is 4 as the schema fully covers the single parameter.

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 'Delete multiple Edges' clearly states the action (delete) and resource (Edges), but it's vague about what 'Edges' are in this context (likely 3D modeling edges). It doesn't distinguish from sibling deletion tools like deleteFaces or deleteVertexs beyond naming the resource type.

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 provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., whether edges must be selected first), constraints, or what happens after deletion. With many sibling deletion tools, this lack of differentiation is problematic.

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