set_ik_rig_retarget_root

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It reveals the return type and provides an example, but it does not mention side effects, prerequisites, failure modes, or whether the operation overwrites an existing retarget root. For a mutation tool, this is a meaningful gap.

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 well structured with Purpose, Args, Returns, KB, and Example sections. Every section is functional and there is no filler, though the formatting is slightly longer than strictly necessary.

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 simple three-parameter setter, the description covers all parameters, gives concrete examples, states the return shape, and points to the knowledge base. It is missing explicit preconditions and error behavior, but overall an agent can invoke the tool with reasonable confidence.

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%, but the description fully compensates by documenting each parameter with both a human explanation and an example: ik_rig_name, ik_rig_path, and root_bone. This is exactly the semantic detail an agent needs that the bare schema lacks.

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 opens with a specific verb-resource pair: 'Set the retarget root bone on an IK Rig.' It also explains the purpose of the retarget root, distinguishing this tool from related IK Rig creation and retargeting tools by focusing specifically on the root-bone assignment.

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 gives helpful context ('typically the pelvis/hips bone', 'used by the IK Retargeter to align the global position'), which implies when the tool is relevant. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over or against alternatives such as add_ik_rig_retarget_chain or create_ik_retargeter.

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