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. 'Update' implies mutation, but it doesn't disclose: whether this requires specific permissions, if changes are destructive/reversible, rate limits, error handling for invalid IDs, or what happens to unspecified properties. The batch nature is mentioned but without behavioral details.

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?

Single sentence, zero waste - 'Update multiple Vertexs in a single operation' is maximally concise. 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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'Vertexs' are, what 'update' entails, return values, error conditions, or how this differs from similar tools. The 100% schema coverage helps with parameters but doesn't compensate for missing behavioral context.

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%, so the schema fully documents the 'items' parameter and its nested properties. The description adds no parameter information beyond what's in the schema - no syntax examples, format clarifications, or usage patterns. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does all the work.

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 Vertexs') and resource ('Vertexs'), but it's vague about what 'Vertexs' are in this context (3D modeling vertices?). It doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'updateMeshs' or 'transformVertices' - the 'multiple in a single operation' aspect is somewhat distinguishing but not clearly contrasted with alternatives.

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 like 'updateMeshs', 'transformVertices', or 'batchSetProperty'. The description mentions 'multiple Vertexs in a single operation' which implies batch efficiency, but doesn't specify use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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