rba_teleport_to_part

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the core teleport action but does not disclose error behavior on invalid paths, timeout semantics, yaw handling, or whether a client must be selected.

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 a single clear, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. However, it is somewhat under-specified relative to the number of parameters, though conciseness itself is good.

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 seven parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is not complete enough. It fails to explain the target selector, offset coordinate semantics, timeout behavior, or return/result information.

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 description coverage is only 14%, so the description must compensate. It only hints at the path and a generic 'local offset', leaving target selection (all/first/integer), yawDegrees, and timeoutMs unexplained.

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 ('Teleport') and clearly identifies the resource: the local character to a Workspace BasePart or Model path. It also notes an optional local offset, distinguishing this from sibling tools that teleport to positions or places.

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 is provided on when to choose this tool over rba_teleport_to_position or rba_teleport_to_place. The only implicit differentiator is the use of a path, but no explicit context or exclusions are stated.

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