center_objects

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility. It describes the effect (moving objects to center) but does not disclose whether the operation is destructive or reversible, nor does it mention any side effects like changes to object scale or rotation.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff. The first sentence communicates the primary action, and the second covers the parameter's default behavior. Perfectly front-loaded.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It explains the core functionality and parameter usage. Minor gap: no mention of return value, but contextually unnecessary.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description explains the 'names' parameter's effect: if omitted, all objects are centered. This adds meaningful context beyond the bare schema type definition.

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 uses a specific verb ('Move objects') and clearly states the result ('collective center at world origin'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'align_objects' and 'origin_set' by focusing on group center rather than individual transforms.

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 includes when to use (centering objects) and the behavior when no names are given (centers all objects in the scene). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or suggest alternative tools like 'origin_set' for individual objects.

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