rotate_object

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

With no annotations, the description conveys that rotation uses degrees by default and supports relative rotation, which are key behavioral traits. However, it does not specify the coordinate system, rotation order, or what happens when degrees=False. This leaves some ambiguity for an AI agent.

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 concise, only two sentences with no extra information. It is well-structured and to the point.

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 six parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain the coordinate system, rotation order, or the role of each axis parameter. The tool's behavior is only partially described.

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 only explains the 'degrees' and 'relative' parameters, leaving the x, y, z, and name parameters unaddressed. The schema provides their types and defaults, but the description does not add semantic meaning such as that x,y,z are Euler angles or that they represent rotation around respective axes.

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?

Clearly states 'Rotate an object', providing a specific verb and resource. The mention of degrees and relative mode adds clarity. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like translate_object or scale_object, but the name and context make the distinction clear enough.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like translate_object or align_objects. The description does not provide any context about typical use cases or prerequisites.

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