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 Materials' implies a destructive mutation, but it doesn't disclose whether deletion is permanent, reversible, requires specific permissions, affects dependent objects, or has rate limits. For a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage, this is inadequate.

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 just two words. It's front-loaded with the essential action and resource, with zero wasted words. For such a simple tool, this level of brevity is appropriate.

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 this is a destructive mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what happens after deletion, whether there are confirmation prompts, error conditions, or what 'Materials' represent in this system. The context demands more behavioral disclosure.

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 the 'ids' parameter clearly documented as 'Material identifiers to delete'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, but with complete schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 Materials' clearly states the verb (delete) and resource (Materials), but it's vague about scope and doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'deleteMeshes' or 'deleteBlendShapes'. It doesn't specify what 'Materials' are in this context or whether this is a batch operation versus single deletion.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, permissions needed, or when to choose this over other deletion tools like 'deleteMeshes'. With many sibling deletion tools present, this lack of differentiation is a significant gap.

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