Add a Skin modifier to mesh objects, preparing them for skin deformation and rigging.
给网格对象添加 Skin 修改器，为蒙皮做准备。 [English] Add a Skin modifier to a mesh object, preparing it for skinning.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| objects | No | 对象名列表；省略则用当前选择。 | Object names; omit for the current selection. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations declare destructiveHint=true, which suggests the operation may modify the object stack, but the description provides no additional behavioral detail. It does not mention that the modifier is added to the stack, whether it overwrites existing modifiers, or if there are prerequisites. The description adds minimal value beyond the annotations.
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 concise, providing both English and Chinese versions without unnecessary detail. The key purpose is stated upfront, and the bilingual format is efficient for the target audience.
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 the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description is sufficient for an agent to call it correctly. It clearly indicates the action and target object, and the parameter is optional with clear default behavior. No critical missing information.
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 parameter 'objects' is already documented as a list of object names with an optional default to current selection. The description does not add additional semantic information beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 adds a Skin modifier to a mesh object in preparation for skinning, which is a specific verb-resource pair. It also includes bilingual text, but the purpose is unambiguous and distinguishes it from sibling tools like rig_skin_add_bone.
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 implies the tool is for setting up skinning, and among siblings like rig_skin_auto_weight, it is clear this is a preliminary step. However, it does not explicitly exclude cases where the object already has a modifier or when to prefer auto-weight, but the context is clear enough.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.