rig_morpher_add

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds minimal behavioral context by framing the modifier as preparation for morph target animation, but it does not disclose what happens to the existing modifier stack or whether an object must be editable.

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: it states the action and purpose in two short bilingual sentences with no filler or repetition. Every sentence contributes meaning.

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 simple one-parameter modifier-add tool, the description plus schema is largely sufficient. It could mention applicability to multiple objects or prerequisites, but the core call pattern is clear.

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%, and the schema already explains that the objects parameter is a list of object names and that omitting it uses the current selection. The description adds no additional parameter-level detail, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action: 'Add a Morpher modifier to an object' and the purpose: preparing for morph target animation. It is specific about the resource and verb, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from generic mod_add or the related rig_morpher_* siblings.

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 intended use is implied by the purpose phrase 'preparing it for morph target animation,' but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like mod_add or rig_morpher_add_target. No exclusions or alternative routing are provided.

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