3D-MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Update multiple Edges', implying a mutation operation, but doesn't mention permissions, side effects, error handling, or response format. This is inadequate for a tool that modifies data without any structured safety hints.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the key information ('Update multiple Edges') and adds necessary context ('in a single operation'), making it easy to parse quickly.

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 the complexity of updating multiple edges (a mutation operation), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on behavioral traits, error conditions, and what the tool returns, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to use it correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema fully documents the 'items' parameter and its nested properties. The description adds no additional parameter details beyond implying batch processing ('multiple Edges', 'single operation'), which is already evident from the schema. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 states the action ('Update multiple Edges') and scope ('in a single operation'), which clarifies the verb and resource. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'updateEdges' (if it exists) or 'updateFaces', 'updateVertexs', etc., leaving ambiguity about when to use this specific update tool versus others.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description mentions 'multiple Edges' and 'single operation', but it doesn't specify prerequisites, exclusions, or compare it to sibling tools like 'updateFaces' or 'updateVertexs', leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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