set_actor_property

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions value is passed as-is, but does not describe destructive behavior, auth needs, error handling, or side effects. This is insufficient 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 very concise with two sentences, no redundancy. However, it could be slightly expanded to cover parameter semantics without becoming 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 3 required params with no schema descriptions and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on return values (even though output schema exists, its content is unknown) and expected behavior on failure.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description only adds meaning for the 'value' parameter (passed as-is). It does not explain 'name' or 'property_name', leaving the agent to infer their meaning.

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 sets an editor property on an actor, with specific examples like 'mobility', 'hidden', and 'intensity'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like set_actor_transform by focusing on editing properties rather than 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 implies usage for setting editor properties, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., set_actor_transform). No when-not-to-use or exclusions are provided.

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