batch_execute_on_objects

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

Annotations only provide a title and no readOnly or destructive hints, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses that arbitrary code runs on each object, but gives no detail about side effects, selection behavior, undo safety, or error reporting.

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 a single clear sentence with no filler and front-loads the core action. However, it is so minimal that some important behavioral context is omitted, which slightly reduces the effectiveness of its brevity.

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 an arbitrary-code execution tool, this description is incomplete. It does not specify which objects are targeted, how selection interacts with `only_selected`, what the code can access, or what the tool returns, and there is no output schema or rich annotation to fill the gap.

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%, and the description only adds meaning by mentioning the `obj` variable. It does not explain how `only_selected` affects execution, what format `code` must take, or how results are returned.

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 action: execute code with an `obj` variable on each object, which conveys a batch per-object execution tool. It is distinguishable from siblings like execute_blender_code or batch_process_directory, though it does not explicitly name an alternative.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus execute_blender_code, batch_process_directory, or other batch tools. The phrase 'on each object' implies batch usage, but there are no explicit conditions, exclusions, or alternative recommendations.

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