Transform Node

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

Annotations already provide idempotentHint=true (safe to retry) and openWorldHint=true (possible side effects). The description adds the behavioral detail that properties are set absolutely, but doesn't elaborate on side effects or constraints beyond annotation hints. With annotations present, the added value is moderate.

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 sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource, and contains no superfluous words. It is maximally efficient.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description need not explain return values. It covers the key aspects: operation, parameters, and the 'any subset' flexibility. It could mention the necessity of both nodeId and nodeName, but the schema already lists them as required.

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 100% with descriptions for each parameter. The description adds value by clarifying that properties are absolute and that 'any subset' can be specified, which is not inferred from the schema alone.

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 explicitly states the verb ('Move and/or resize'), the resource ('node'), and the specific properties (x/y/width/height) with the nuance 'any subset'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like node_set_fill or node_apply_style.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (setting absolute position/size). It doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, but given the sibling list contains no other transform tools, the guidance is sufficient.

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