Blender Add Rigid Body Constraint

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses the mutation (add constraint) but omits behavioral traits such as whether objects are modified, potential errors (e.g., if objects lack rigid bodies), or destructive effects. Minimal transparency beyond the action verb.

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?

Single sentence with verb and resource front-loaded, no unnecessary words. All information is essential and efficiently presented.

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 8 parameters (including a nested object) and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It omits prerequisites (e.g., rigid body setup), behavior on failure, and return value. The complexity of constraint types and properties is not addressed, leaving gaps for an AI agent.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description lists constraint types (matching the enum) but adds no semantic meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain the `properties` nested object or other parameters, so no added value.

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 the verb 'Add', the resource 'rigid body constraint', and specifies the supported constraint types in parentheses. It distinguishes from sibling tools like blender_setup_rigid_body which sets up the physics world, not individual constraints.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance is provided. The description implies usage for adding constraints but does not mention prerequisites (e.g., objects must have rigid bodies) or alternatives. The context with sibling tools suggests but does not clarify.

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