remove_scene_node

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

Annotations provide no readOnlyHint or destructiveHint, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states 'remove' implying destructiveness but doesn't disclose side effects, reversibility, or required permissions. Insufficient for a destructive operation.

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 very concise (one sentence) but lacks important context. It is not well-structured; while brevity is valued, it sacrifices necessary detail.

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 tool's simplicity and no output schema, the description should explain what happens after removal (e.g., confirmation, error messages). It omits 'headless' definition and success indicators, making it incomplete for a destructive tool.

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 100%; each parameter already has a description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score 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 clearly states the action (remove) and resource (node from scene file). The term 'headless' adds context about execution mode. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like game_remove_node, which likely operates during runtime.

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, such as modify_scene_node or game_remove_node. No prerequisites or context provided for effective invocation.

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