batch_execute

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It thoroughly explains sequential execution, stop-on-first-error, default undo behavior, atomic-on-failure semantics, and that rollback only applies to sub-commands modifying the currently edited scene. This is strong transparency for a mutation 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?

The description is dense but well-structured and front-loaded. However, it references "The example below" when no example is actually present, which is a minor structural flaw. Everything else earns its place and is appropriately sized for a complex batch tool.

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 and the lack of annotations, the description is remarkably complete. It covers composition semantics, failure atomicity, undo behavior, path conventions, sub-command constraints, and even addresses session targeting indirectly through the schema. The output schema handles return-value expectations, so no additional return documentation is needed.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the schema's commands parameter is only loosely typed as an array of objects with additionalProperties true. The description adds critical meaning by specifying the exact item structure, requiring plugin command names, giving examples, and explaining scene path conventions (relative to the edited scene root, not /root/...).

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: "Execute a list of editor sub-commands in order, stopping on first error." It clearly distinguishes this batch tool from the individual sibling tools (node_create, node_set_property, etc.) by focusing on composing multiple sub-commands in a single call.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance: "Use this to compose multi-step edits (create node + set property + attach script) into a single tool call." It also gives a when-not rule by stating batch_execute itself cannot be a sub-command and clarifies that plugin command names, not MCP tool names, must be used.

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