rig-set_pose_bone

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions it sets location, rotation, and/or scale, but does not disclose whether it overwrites existing values, whether rotation_mode defaults to XYZ, or any side effects on the bone's transform. It is not misleading, but is minimal.

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, which is efficient. It front-loads the core purpose without fluff, though it could be slightly more structured by listing the parameters in detail, but as is, it is appropriately sized for its limited content.

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?

The tool has 6 parameters, 2 required, and no output schema. The description only covers the three optional transform arrays, leaving the required parameters (armature, bone) and the rotation_mode parameter undocumented in the description. Given the moderate complexity and lack of annotations, a more comprehensive description is expected.

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. The description only lists the three main properties (location, rotation, scale) but does not mention the required parameters (armature, bone) or the rotation_mode parameter with its default and enum values. The schema titles provide some context, but the description adds little beyond what a user could infer.

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 sets a pose bone's location, rotation, and scale, using a specific verb ('Set') and resource ('pose bone'). It distinguishes from siblings like rig-set_bone_transform (which likely sets overall bone transform) by focusing on pose bones, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with that sibling.

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 usage for editing a pose bone's properties but does not specify when to use this over alternatives like rig-set_bone_transform or rig-add_bone. It lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., armature must exist, bone must be a pose bone) and does not mention that rotation_mode is optional with a default.

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