set_scene_group

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention side effects (e.g., whether the group is created if it doesn't exist), error conditions, or permissions. The 'add' boolean is explained, but deeper behavior is missing.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the core action, but could be slightly improved by adding context without becoming verbose.

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?

No output schema, so the return value is unknown. Preconditions (node existence, group existence) and error handling are not described. For a tool that modifies scene state, this is incomplete.

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 input schema covers all three parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; the 'add' boolean's role is already clear from the parameter description. Baseline 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?

Description states 'Add or remove a node from a group', which clearly indicates the tool modifies group membership for a specific node. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'set_node_groups' (likely sets multiple groups) and 'find_nodes_in_group' (query only). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'set_node_groups'.

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 vs alternatives like 'set_node_groups' or 'find_nodes_in_group'. No prerequisites (e.g., node must exist, group must exist) or post-conditions are mentioned.

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