ue_x3d_apply

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds that it validates first and applies transforms, but lacks details on side effects like overriding previous transforms, reversibility, or undo behavior. The version note (v0.4.0) adds minimal context.

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 concise (3 sentences), front-loaded with the primary action, and includes a version note. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 existence of an output schema, return values are covered. However, the description lacks context on the input format and does not address potential failure modes beyond returning an error. For a tool with moderate complexity and no additional annotations beyond destructiveHint, a bit more detail would be helpful.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage for the only parameter ('x3d'). The description does not explain what the 'x3d' string should contain (e.g., file path, content, XML). It merely mentions 'X3D document's actor transforms', which is insufficient for an agent to construct the parameter correctly.

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 explicitly states the tool's function: 'Apply an X3D document's actor transforms back to the live level.' It specifies the process (validates, then sets location/rotation/scale) and resource (transforms addressed by DEF). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ue_x3d_export and ue_x3d_validate.

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 mentions a prerequisite: 'Actors must already exist.' However, it does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., ue_x3d_preview), nor does it specify when not to use it. The usage context is implied but not explicitly differentiated.

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