blender_transform_object

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

Annotations are all false, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It adds useful partial-update behavior and unit semantics, but it does not clarify what look_at does to rotation, how supplied fields interact, or what happens for unknown targets. Informative but not comprehensive for a mutating 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?

Three short sentences, each carrying distinct information: operation scope, targeting preference, and units. No filler, redundancy, or irrelevant context.

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?

Covers the main decision points: partial update, target selection, and units. However, the semantics of look_at, interaction between supplied fields, and error behavior for missing targets are left under-specified, and there is no output schema to compensate.

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?

Adds meaning beyond the schema: scale is unitless (the schema's repeated array descriptions incorrectly say distances/radians), dimensions are meters, rotation is Euler radians, and target_uuid is preferred over target_name. This is especially valuable because several schema property descriptions are copy-pasted and misleading.

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?

States 'Update only supplied transform fields', a specific verb and resource with a clear partial-update scope. The transform focus differentiates it from sibling animation, hierarchy, and material tools even without naming them.

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?

Provides useful targeting guidance ('Prefer stable target_uuid; target_name is a readable fallback') but does not state when to choose this tool over alternatives such as blender_keyframe_object or blender_set_parent, nor any exclusion conditions. Usage context is mostly implied rather than explicit.

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