game_bone_pose

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

With no useful annotations (only title), the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states get/set but omits important details: what happens on set (permanent? immediate?), what if the bone doesn't exist, or what the return value looks like for get. The lack of output schema exacerbates this 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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the action. It is concise, but could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose (e.g., mentioning the action parameter).

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 7 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain the default action, how to use parameters together, return format, or error scenarios. The agent lacks sufficient context to invoke the 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?

All 7 parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain how parameters interact (e.g., boneName vs boneIndex, or that position/rotation/scale are used only with action='set').

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 verb ('Get or set') and the resource ('bone poses on a Skeleton3D node'), providing a specific purpose. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like game_skeleton_ik or game_animation_control, which could cause confusion for an AI agent.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, common use cases, or scenarios where other tools (e.g., game_skeleton_ik) would be more appropriate. This leaves the agent without decision criteria.

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