rig-pose_report

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. The word 'report' suggests a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly state non-destructiveness, permissions, or what happens if invalid parameters are given. Minimal transparency beyond the action itself.

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 concise sentence with no redundant words. It efficiently states the purpose without filler.

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 exists, so the description should explain what the report returns or the format. It only says 'transforms and constraints' without specifying scope (e.g., all bones or selected ones) or return structure. Incomplete for a tool with no structural guidance.

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 by explaining parameters. It does not mention 'bone' or 'armature' at all, leaving the schema titles as the only guidance. No added meaning, so it fails to help the agent understand parameter usage.

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 tool reports pose bone transforms and constraints. It distinguishes itself from siblings like rig-report (generic) and rig-constraints (constraints only) by specifying 'pose bone' scope and both transforms and constraints.

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 implies using this tool to inspect pose bone data but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like rig-report or rig-constraints. No exclusions or alternative guidance is provided, so it's adequate but lacks explicit direction.

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