rotate_object

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not specify whether the rotation is absolute or relative, or if it replaces existing rotation. This leaves ambiguity about side effects and interaction with other transformations.

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 extremely concise with a one-line summary and a bullet list of parameters. Every sentence serves a purpose, and the information is front-loaded.

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 description adequately covers the tool's basic function and parameters, but omits details such as return value, prerequisite object existence, and whether the rotation is additive or absolute. Given the tool's simplicity, it is moderately complete.

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 parameter list adds meaning beyond the schema: 'x, y, z: Rotation in degrees around each axis' clarifies units and axes. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description compensates well, though it could mention valid ranges or error cases.

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's action: 'Set the Euler rotation of an object (degrees).' This is a specific verb+resource combination, distinguishing it from sibling tools like move_object or scale_object.

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 use this tool versus alternatives like align_objects or set_vertex_positions. The description lacks context on prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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