rhino_batch_modify

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

Annotations only provide a title, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that all changes are wrapped in one undo record and that apply_to_all applies the first spec to every object. This goes well beyond the structured annotation data, though it does not mention potential overwrite semantics or failure behavior.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds useful information: what it does, what fields are allowed, undo behavior, and apply_to_all semantics. No filler or redundancy.

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?

For a batch modification tool, the description covers the main operational aspects: supported modifications, undo grouping, and apply_to_all. Combined with the rich input schema and output schema, most necessary context is present. It lacks explicit alternative routing, but this is not a critical gap for this tool.

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 description adds combination semantics by listing the modifiable fields and explains the apply_to_all flag's effect. However, schema description coverage is low, and the description does not fully compensate by detailing all nested parameters such as rotation center/axis, scale center/factor, or the required id field.

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: 'Modify many objects in a single call.' It clearly enumerates the supported modification types and explains the apply_to_all mode, which distinguishes it from single-object tools like rhino_move, rhino_rotate, or rhino_scale.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: for batch modification of many objects in one call, with an explicit explanation of the apply_to_all behavior. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full exclusion guidance.

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