Modify nodes

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It adds the useful note 'All operations are applied then saved once,' indicating atomic batch save. However, it does not discuss error handling, partial application behavior, or the destructive implications of delete/reparent beyond listing those actions.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes a concise behavioral note. Every word adds value, with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

The tool is complex (4 parameters, 9 operation types), but the description does not mention return values, error behavior, or whether changes persist to disk beyond 'saved once.' The schema covers parameters, but the overall context feels incomplete for an agent to confidently invoke this tool.

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 input schema already provides descriptions for most parameters (action, node, to, name, group, index, script, properties). The description recounts the operation list but does not add new semantic details beyond the schema. It neither compensates for uncovered parameters nor enriches the existing field documentation.

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 'Apply a batch of edits to a scene' and enumerates specific operations (set properties, rename, delete, reparent, reorder, attach/detach scripts, manage groups). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like node_add (single add) and node_inspect (read-only).

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 a batch modification use case but does not explicitly address when to use it versus alternatives such as node_add for single additions or node_inspect for inspection. There is no mention of exclusions or prerequisites, leaving the selection logic to the agent.

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