remove_scene_node

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It mentions removal and the 'headless' context, but omits critical details such as whether the operation cascades to child nodes, is reversible, or requires specific permissions.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single phrase that conveys the core action. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and contains no fluff. However, it could be structured as a complete sentence for clarity.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain return behavior, side effects (e.g., cascading removal of child nodes), or error conditions. A complete description should cover these aspects for a destructive operation.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for each parameter (nodePath, scenePath, projectPath). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 ('Remove') and the resource ('a node from a scene file'), with the qualifier '(headless)' indicating the operational context. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'add_node' and 'modify_scene_node' by specifying removal.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the name and basic action are clear, it does not state prerequisites, when not to use it, or refer to sibling tools for related operations (e.g., modification).

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