Stage Growth Set

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the setting is not persisted until anim_save and that the tool emits nothing, but it does not explain overwrite behavior, permission requirements, validation constraints, or what happens to other trees.

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 purpose is front-loaded and the description is compact, with each sentence adding relevant behavior such as persistence and return shape. It is slightly dense and jargon-heavy, but not padded.

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 a mutation with four required parameters, no annotations, and 0% schema description coverage. The description covers persistence, return shape, and several parameters, but it leaves the scene parameter and important mutation semantics undocumented; the output schema reduces the need to explain return values further.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains name as the tree's top-level item and t0/t1 as the start and end of growth, but it never explains the required scene parameter and does not clarify time units or ordering constraints.

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 states a specific operation: mapping clock timing onto one tree's growth from t0 to t1. It distinguishes the scope as one tree and clarifies persistence via anim_save, though it does not explicitly contrast with nearby animation tools such as stage_key_set or stage_timeline_show.

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?

It gives an important usage condition: the change is not saved until anim_save. It also references the page command and return payload, but it does not say when to use this tool instead of related stage animation or keying tools, nor does it state exclusions.

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