Set a property value on multiple Blender objects in a single operation to update them all consistently.
Set the same property on multiple objects at once.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| value | Yes | ||
| objects | Yes | ||
| property | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0+hardened.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Set' implies mutation, but the description does not state whether existing property values are overwritten, whether missing properties are created, how errors on individual objects are handled, or whether the operation is atomic.
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 one short sentence with no filler and it leads with the core action. It is concise, though it sacrifices useful contextual detail that could have been added without bloating the description.
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 batch mutation tool with no annotations and 0% parameter coverage, this description is too thin. An agent is not told what kinds of properties are valid, whether the operation creates or overwrites properties, or how object identifiers are resolved; the output schema exists but does not excuse the missing operational context.
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 it only clarifies that the property is applied to multiple objects. It does not explain the allowed domain of the property string, how objects are referenced, or the role/value constraints of the value parameter beyond what the bare parameter names suggest.
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 identifies a specific operation: setting one property across multiple objects. The phrase 'same property' and 'at once' clearly establish the batch scope, which distinguishes it from the many sibling set_*_property tools that target a single element.
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 use case is implied: use this tool when the same property must be applied to multiple objects, rather than calling an individual setter repeatedly. However, it names no alternative tools and gives no exclusions or conditions for when an individual setter would be more appropriate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.