update_property

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Update' without explaining side effects (e.g., auto-save, undo history), requirements (scene must be open), or permissions. The path parameter description adds some context about scene relativity, but overall behavior is opaque.

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 extremely concise (6 words), but this brevity comes at the cost of missing critical details. It is not front-loaded with meaningful content beyond the name's 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 the absence of annotations and output schema, the description should compensate. It does not explain return values, error handling (e.g., invalid path, wrong property type), or how the update is applied (immediate? persisted?). Incomplete for a mutation 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?

The input schema covers all parameters with descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The tool description adds no new parameter information. The 'value' parameter's description ('Property value') is trivial, but the schema already provides the basic semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Update a property value on a node') using a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from sibling tools like 'batch_set_property' by implying a single property update, but does not explicitly distinguish from similar tools like 'cross_scene_set_property'.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'batch_set_property' for multiple updates or 'cross_scene_set_property' for cross-scene changes. The description lacks any usage context or exclusion criteria.

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