object.origin_set

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without revealing side effects (e.g., object transform updates, undo behavior, required mode) or whether the operation is destructive. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the name.

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 (5 words) and front-loaded. However, it sacrifices necessary information for brevity. While every word earns its place, the lack of detail means it is not optimally structured for agent comprehension.

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 has 3 parameters (2 with enums) and no output schema or annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the effect of different 'type' values or the 'center' parameter, nor does it provide usage context or expected outcome. A more comprehensive description is needed for effective 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate but fails to explain parameter meanings. It does not describe the 'type' enum (e.g., ORIGIN_GEOMETRY vs ORIGIN_CURSOR) or the 'center' mode. The schema itself provides defaults and enums, but the description adds no semantic value.

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 'Set an object's origin' clearly states the verb (set) and resource (object's origin). It effectively conveys the core purpose, distinguishing it from sibling tools like object.transform_set which deal with transformation rather than origin. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other origin-related tools if any.

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, such as object.transform_set or context.set_active. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., object must exist or be selected) or scenarios where this tool is inappropriate.

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