Set scene transition

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, but it only states the basic action without mentioning side effects, permission requirements, error handling, or scope (e.g., whether it applies to the current scene collection only). It does not clarify what happens if an invalid transition_name is provided or whether the change is reversible.

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, clear, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It immediately conveys the core function without unnecessary elaboration, earning a top score for conciseness.

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?

This simple setter tool has no annotations and a sparse schema, so the description needs to explain more about expected behavior, but it only provides the bare minimum. It does not mention how to discover valid transitions, what output to expect, or any constraints, leaving the agent under-informed for a state-changing operation.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it does not explicitly describe the transition_name parameter's allowed values, format, or how to obtain valid options. The phrase 'transition' provides minimal context, but it adds little beyond the schema property name itself.

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 uses a specific verb 'set' with a clear resource 'transition' and context 'when switching scenes', which unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_transitions (retrieval) and set_transition_duration (duration). It is immediately evident what the tool does.

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?

Usage context is implied by 'when switching scenes', suggesting this tool is used before or during scene switches to change the transition effect. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives like set_transition_duration or trigger_transition, nor any mention of prerequisites like listing available transitions via get_transitions.

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