Scale Entity

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

Annotations already communicate that this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and not flagged destructive. The description adds meaningful geometric behavior — uniform scaling from a base point — but does not disclose whether the original entity is modified in place, whether undo is supported, or whether there are entity-type restrictions.

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 sentence with no filler. The core action, uniform scaling, and base-point anchoring are all expressed efficiently and up front.

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?

The description covers the core operation, and the schema plus annotations supply parameter and mutation context. However, for a transform tool in a large sibling set, it omits practical context such as whether the original entity is altered or a new entity is produced, and whether any entity types are unsupported.

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?

All four parameters are fully described in the input schema, including the factor semantics with exclusiveMinimum. The description's 'uniformly' clarifies that the factor applies isotropically, but it adds little parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 ('scale') and resource ('entity'), and adds the two key distinguishing qualifiers: uniform scaling and a base point. This is enough for an agent to tell it apart from sibling transform tools like entity_move, entity_rotate, entity_mirror, or entity_offset.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as entity_move, entity_rotate, entity_mirror, or entity_copy. The only implied usage context comes from the tool's name and one-line description.

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