set_fabric_color

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly indicates a mutation ('Set') and explains the conditional behavior of the face parameter, but it does not cover other behavioral traits such as persistence, undo behavior, permission requirements, or what happens with invalid inputs. Some useful context is added, but significant gaps remain.

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 front-loaded with the core action and then uses a compact Args list. Every sentence and parameter note earns its place, with no redundant or filler text.

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 simple setter with no output schema, the description covers the purpose, all parameters, and the important face-separation prerequisite. It is nearly complete for invocation, though a brief note on side effects or immediate visibility in the 3D view could add value. Given the lack of annotations, the description is sufficient but not exhaustive.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by documenting all five parameters: fabric_index as zero-based, RGB channels as 0-255, and face values with a dependency note. It adds meaning well beyond the bare types and defaults in the schema.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Set the PBR base color of a fabric.' It distinguishes the operation from texture-related siblings by specifying 'PBR base color' and references the related set_fabric_faces tool for face separation. An agent can identify the tool's action without ambiguity.

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?

The description gives clear context for the 'face' parameter: back and side only show their own colour after set_fabric_faces has separated them. This is a useful prerequisite, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_fabric_texture or set_fabric_faces. Context is present but exclusions and alternatives are absent.

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