model_extrude_spline

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

Annotations already mark the tool as non-read-only and destructive, so the mutation behavior is known. The description adds useful context that it adds an Extrude modifier and extrudes along an axis, but it does not disclose whether the original spline is preserved or destroyed, or what happens when objects is omitted versus explicitly provided.

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 short, front-loaded with the core action, and uses a bilingual format consistent with the schema. The redundant restatement that 'amount is the height' is minor and does not significantly bloat the 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 five-parameter modeling tool, the description plus fully annotated schema covers the essential behavior: extruding a spline into a solid via an Extrude modifier. It lacks a note about the objects parameter being optional for selection, but the schema already documents that, and annotations convey the destructive nature.

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 coverage is 100% with bilingual descriptions for all five parameters, so the description need not repeat them. The only parameter-related addition is 'amount 为高度', which merely duplicates the schema's own 'Extrusion height' description, adding no new semantics.

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 verb 'extrude' and the resource 'spline (shape)' with the outcome 'into a 3D solid', and specifies the mechanism 'adding an Extrude modifier'. This distinguishes it from similar sibling tools like model_lathe_spline, model_loft, and model_sweep through a different verb and target.

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?

Usage is implied through the phrase 'Extrude a spline (shape)', which indicates this tool is intended for spline objects rather than mesh or general objects. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over the similar mod_extrude tool, no exclusions, and no mention of prerequisites like an active selection.

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