set_actor_transform

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions write operations but lacks details on error conditions (e.g., ambiguous name), idempotency, or permissions. The schema hints at an error for ambiguous labels, but the description does not highlight this.

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 with two sentences that front-load the core action and add the crucial distinction of relative mode. Every sentence is necessary and efficient.

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?

For a tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and modes. It lacks details on error handling and what happens if all optional parameters are omitted, but overall is sufficiently complete for typical 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 baseline is 3. The description adds clarity by emphasizing 'name (label or FName)' and 'absolute and relative modes', providing context beyond the schema's individual descriptions.

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 verb-action ('Move / rotate / scale') and the resource ('an existing actor by name'). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'set_actor_property' by specifically targeting transform properties.

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 explains that both absolute and relative modes are supported, giving clear context on how to use the tool. However, it does not provide guidance on when not to use it or alternatives, such as using 'set_actor_property' for non-transform changes.

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