cross_scene_set_property

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention that the operation is destructive, that confirmation is required via confirm_no_undo, or what happens if no matching nodes are found. The parameter's description hints at destructiveness, but the main description omits this crucial 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 a single efficient sentence (12 words) that conveys the core purpose without fluff, though a bit more detail on behavior would be welcome.

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 complexity (4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It fails to explain the destructive nature, the role of confirm_no_undo, or the interpretation of 'across multiple scenes' (all loaded scenes or all scenes in project). Missing essential context for safe use.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions; it does not explain how the parameters interact or provide examples.

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 ('Set a property'), the target ('nodes of a given type'), and the scope ('across multiple scenes'), which differentiates it from sibling tools like batch_set_property or set_game_node_property that likely operate within a single scene.

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 implies use for cross-scene modifications but does not explicitly provide when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives like single-scene property setters.

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