scale_object

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It indicates the tool modifies scale (relative or absolute) but fails to mention that it changes the object's transform in place, whether it is undoable, or if it affects children or constraints. The description is incomplete for a mutation tool.

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 with two short sentences, front-loading the purpose in the first sentence. It is efficient but omits some details, earning a high score for conciseness without being overly verbose.

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 tool has 6 parameters, no schema descriptions, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain prerequisites (e.g., object existence), side effects (e.g., affects object's transform), return values, or how it interacts with other transformations (e.g., overwriting vs accumulating). The description leaves significant gaps for an agent to invoke correctly.

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?

Schema documentation coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the 'uniform' parameter (scale equally when set) and 'relative' parameter (multiply vs absolute). However, it does not explain the x, y, z parameters individually or the required 'name' parameter. The description adds partial value but is not comprehensive.

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 tool scales an object, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like rotate_object and translate_object, but does not explicitly differentiate from similar tools like apply_transform which also handles scaling.

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 guidance on how to use the uniform and relative parameters, but does not specify when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., batch_transform for multiple objects or apply_transform for permanent scaling). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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