scale_entity

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It only states the basic transformation, but does not clarify whether the entity is mutated in place, what the return value is, or how 'selection' works. This is minimal for a transformation tool.

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 efficient sentence with no redundancy. It packs the core operation into a compact form, though it achieves this at the cost of missing useful details.

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?

While an output schema exists, the description still lacks essential context for a 4-parameter tool with zero schema descriptions. It does not explain the selection mechanism, base point semantics, or the effect of the factor, making it incomplete for reliable invocation.

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?

Input schema coverage is 0%, and the description provides only partial meaning: it explains 'base point' and 'factor' implicitly, but 'handle' remains vague. It does not explicitly map parameters to their roles, leaving significant ambiguity.

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 action (scale), the resource (one entity or selection), and the method (from a base point by factor). This distinguishes it from siblings like scale_all, rotate_entity, and move_entity.

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 use for individual entities or a selection, but does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives like scale_all. There is no exclusion or mention of alternative tools.

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