cross_scene_set_property

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It explicitly states 'previews by default, requires force=true to write', which discloses the preview/write mode and guards against accidental mutation. It also clarifies the operation happens 'across all scene files on disk', which is a significant behavioral scope. This is value beyond the schema.

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?

One succinct sentence front-loaded with the action and scope. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's core functionality and key safety behavior. No filler.

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 tool's complexity (7 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is too brief. It omits critical contextual details such as how path_filter and exclude_addons affect the scope, what dry_run does relative to the preview default, and what happens to existing files or unsaved changes. Complete enough for a simple tool but not for this one.

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 for parameter meanings. It only hints at 'force=true' and the relational mapping of 'engine class' to the 'type' parameter. Parameters like path_filter, exclude_addons, and dry_run are not explained. With 7 parameters and zero schema descriptions, this is a major gap.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Set one property on every node of a given engine class across all scene files on disk.' This distinguishes it from siblings by emphasizing cross-scene, on-disk scope, and mass assignment of a single property. No ambiguity.

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 usage context (bulk property updates across scenes) but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like batch_set_property or update_property. It provides no exclusions or prerequisites. The 'previews by default, requires force=true to write' hints at safe usage but not when to use versus not use.

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