ue_blend_mood_presets

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

Annotations indicate idempotent, non-readonly, non-destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral details: interpolation method, snap threshold (t>=0.5), and that numeric/color values interpolate while toggles snap. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Two concise sentences. The first states the action and general effect, the second explains the parameter t and its behavior (interpolation vs snap). No redundant or unnecessary information.

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 output schema existence, return values are not required. The description covers input semantics well (t, interpolation types). It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., valid preset names from ue_list_mood_presets) or error conditions, but for a blending tool with clear interpolative behavior, it is largely complete.

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 descriptions are absent (0% coverage), so the description carries full burden. It explains t (value between 0 and 1, default 0.5) and its effect on preset_a vs preset_b. It also describes interpolation behavior for different property types. However, preset_a and preset_b are only identified as 'mood presets' without mentioning source (e.g., from ue_list_mood_presets). This partial compensation earns a 4.

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 'Blend... and apply' and identifies the resources (mood presets). It explains the effect (interpolation of numeric/color values, snapping of toggles) and implicitly distinguishes from the sibling 'ue_apply_mood_preset' by focusing on blending two presets.

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 clear usage context: 'Great for dialing a look between two references.' It explains the t parameter behavior but does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives. Still, the guidance is sufficient for an AI agent to infer appropriate usage.

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