game_set_particles

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It simply states 'Configure...node properties' without revealing whether changes take effect immediately, if the scene must be running, or any side effects. This is a significant omission.

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 a single sentence, concise and direct. The verb 'Configure' is front-loaded. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity.

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 (9 parameters, nested object) and lack of output schema or annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, usage patterns, or how the nested 'processMaterial' parameter works.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the parameter names and types already in the schema. No parameter-specific clarifications or examples are given.

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 'Configure GPUParticles2D/3D node properties' clearly states the action (configure) and the resource (GPUParticles2D/3D node properties). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'game_3d_effects' and 'game_light_3d' by targeting particle-specific properties.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'game_set_property' or 'game_set_shader_param'. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or scenarios where this tool is inappropriate.

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