keyshot_apply_material

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

The description mentions saving the scene, implying changes are persisted. However, it does not disclose whether the original scene file is modified (outputScenePath suggests a new file), nor any side effects. With no annotations, the description partially covers behavior but is not thorough.

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, no redundancy, front-loaded with action and result. Efficient but could be slightly more structured with bullet points for clarity.

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 6 parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief. It does not explain object identification, material resolution rules, or output format. Missing crucial context for a complex tool.

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 0%, so the description must add meaning. It notes material can be specified by 'name or material file', corresponding to materialName/materialPath. However, it does not explain the object identification parameters (objectName vs objectPath) or their interaction, leaving ambiguity.

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 applies a material (by name or file) to a scene object and saves the result. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like keyshot_render or keyshot_import_model.

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 vs alternatives (e.g., keyshot_inspect_scene for inspection) or when not to use it. Lacks context for selecting this tool over others.

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