manage_scene_structure

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

With no annotations beyond title, the description carries the full burden. It only lists actions (rename, duplicate, move) but fails to disclose any side effects, such as whether changes are saved immediately, required permissions, or impact on other nodes.

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 single-sentence description is concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it could include more detail without being verbose. Still, it earns a high score for efficiency.

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 tool has moderate complexity (6 params, no output schema). The description covers the main actions but lacks details on return values, prerequisites (e.g., scene must be loaded), and boundaries between siblings. It is adequate but has gaps.

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 6 parameters have descriptions in the schema, so coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, earning the baseline score of 3.

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 tool's actions (rename, duplicate, move) and the resource type (nodes within .tscn scenes). It uses a specific verb+resource pattern, distinguishing it from siblings like add_node or remove_scene_node.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as modify_scene_node or remove_scene_node. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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