rotate_entity

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It does not disclose whether the rotation is relative or absolute, whether it modifies the entity permanently, or if it affects nested components. The phrase 'rotate an entity' implies mutation but does not confirm behavioral traits.

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, front-loaded sentence with no waste. Every word contributes meaning: verb, resource, axis method, angle unit. It is shorter than necessary for some dimensions but 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 4-parameter mutation tool with no output schema or annotations, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain whether rotation is absolute or relative, whether axis is world or local, or what happens to entity position. Context signals indicate no output schema, so return format is entirely unspecified.

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% with clear parameter descriptions. The description adds minimal additional meaning, confirming that the angle is in degrees. With full schema coverage, baseline is 3; the description does not significantly enhance understanding beyond the schema.

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 'rotate', the resource 'entity', and the method 'around an axis by a given angle in degrees'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like move_entity and scale_entity. However, it lacks specificity about coordinate system (global vs local) or whether the rotation modifies the entity in place.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like scale_entity or follow_me. No context about prerequisites, effects on other entities, or when rotation is inappropriate.

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