reparent_node

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It states the basic action but does not disclose behavioral traits such as what happens to the node's children, signals, or how the optional 'keep_global_transform' parameter affects the outcome. The description is too minimal for safe invocation.

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, which is concise but lacks any structure. It does not front-load critical information beyond the bare action. While there is no wasted text, it also does not earn its place by providing value beyond the tool name.

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 complexity of 3 parameters, no schema descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain the implications of reparenting, such as whether child nodes move, or what happens to transforms. The agent likely cannot use this tool correctly.

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 adds no information about the three parameters (node_path, new_parent_path, keep_global_transform). The agent cannot infer the type of paths or the effect of toggling keep_global_transform from the description alone.

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?

Description clearly states the action ('reparent') and the resource ('node') with the target ('to a new parent'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_node, delete_node, duplicate_node by specifying a unique operation.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like move_node or duplicate_node. No prerequisites (e.g., node must exist, new parent must be valid) are mentioned. The agent must infer usage context.

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