get_absolute_transform

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/openWorld=false, but the description adds real behavioral value: it is editor-world only, it reads the root SceneComponent, and it degrades gracefully (has_root:false) rather than failing when no RootComponent exists. Return contract is also spelled out, which matters since there is no output schema.

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?

Three tight sentences plus a compact Returns block; the core purpose and the sibling relationship are front-loaded. The Returns block is justified because no output schema exists, though the wording 'flags' versus actual transform values is slightly compressed.

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 compensates for the absent output schema by enumerating the return shape, and it notes editor-world scope and the root-component target. The only unaddressed case is what happens when the named actor does not exist at all, a minor gap for a read-only lookup.

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?

With one parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents actor_name as GetName/GetActorLabel, exact match, editor world only. The description adds no further parameter detail, so the baseline of 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 states a precise verb and resource: read the absolute world-space location/rotation/scale flags of an actor's root SceneComponent. It explicitly frames itself against the sibling set_absolute_transform, so an agent can place it without opening either schema.

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?

It names the paired setter (set_absolute_transform) as the write counterpart and gives a concrete diagnostic situation: the first thing to check when an attached actor inherits an unexpected offset or scale. It does not contrast against the many other transform/read getters, but the when-to-use context is clear.

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