set_pose

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of transparency. It discloses the core behavior (set pose, optionally insert keyframe) but does not clarify edge cases like conflict between rotation_euler and rotation_quaternion, or the effect of omitting scale. This leaves some behavioral uncertainty.

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—a single sentence that packs the essential parameter structure and keyframe behavior. There is no redundancy or filler, and the formatting (bones={...}) is unambiguous.

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 that this is a mutation tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the input requirements and the key action. It does not mention return values, which is acceptable, but the lack of guidance on the 'armature' and 'frame' parameters slightly reduces completeness.

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 thoroughly explains the 'bones' parameter structure and the 'keyframe' flag, but gives no explanation for 'armature' (the target object) and 'frame' (the frame number). With schema description coverage at 0%, the description only partially compensates for hidden parameters, leaving these two ambiguous.

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 purpose: setting the pose of bones, with a concise specification of the bone parameters (location, rotation_euler/quaternion, scale). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like set_transform (which applies to objects) and insert_keyframe (which is a separate operation).

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 explicitly mentions the keyframe behavior ('keyframe 时打关键帧'), indicating when to use the flag. It does not explicitly compare with alternatives, but the context of bone posing is clear enough. The instruction is brief but sufficient for the intended use.

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