mat_delete

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

The annotations already mark the tool as destructive and non-read-only, but the description adds important behavioral details: every object using the material gets its material slot emptied, editor slots are cleared, and the objects themselves are not deleted. This goes beyond the structured metadata and warns the agent about side effects.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence adds information. The bilingual content is justified and does not read as padding.

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 single-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It explains the action, the side effects on objects and editor slots, and explicitly states what will not happen, which is exactly the information an agent needs before calling it.

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 already documents the only parameter, 'material', as a material name with 100% coverage. The description repeats this concept but adds no additional detail about name formatting, uniqueness, or how to specify the material. Baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema carries the semantic weight.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: '从场景中删除一个材质' / 'Delete a material from the scene', and clarifies the exact behavior of unassigning it from objects and clearing editor slots. It also distinguishes itself from material manipulation tools like mat_rename and mat_assign by stating deletion semantics.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: when a material should be removed from the scene and detached from objects. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives such as mat_duplicate or mat_assign, nor does it state when not to use this tool.

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