reparent_node

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

The description adds valuable context beyond annotations by noting the operation is undoable, which is a safety-relevant behavior not captured by the annotations. It also scopes the action to the open scene, providing operational context. No contradiction exists with the annotations.

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, compact sentence that immediately front-loads the core action and context. Every word contributes value with no redundancy or 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?

While the simple mutation and the 'undoable' note provide some context, the description omits how to identify nodes, what happens if the new parent is invalid, and alternative conditions that could affect invocation. For a tool with no output schema and sparse annotations, this leaves noticeable gaps.

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?

The description implies that 'target' is the node being moved and 'new_parent' is the destination, adding some meaning beyond the bare string types in the schema. However, it does not specify how to reference nodes (e.g., NodePath, name, or ID), and with 0% schema coverage, this lack of operational detail leaves room for incorrect 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 verb 'Move', the resource 'node', and the specific operation 'under a new parent' in the open scene, effectively distinguishing it from siblings like move_node which likely handles transforms. It is specific and unambiguous.

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 vs alternatives like move_node, rename_node, or delete_node. It does not mention any preconditions, exclusions, or explicit contexts where reparent_node is preferred, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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