unfreeze_all

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

The description only restates the operation without adding behavioral context beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true). It does not mention side effects, reversibility, or batch-wide impact, though the scene-wide scope is already explicit. With annotations carrying the safety profile, this is acceptable but not additive.

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 minimal, with the action and scope front-loaded in the first words. The Chinese and English versions duplicate the same statement but are each short and serve different language audiences, with no filler.

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 zero-parameter global operation, the description fully explains what the tool does and the scope it affects ('every frozen object in the scene'). No output schema is present, and none is needed to invoke the tool correctly.

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 tool accepts zero parameters and the input schema is empty, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. This matches the baseline for a parameterless tool.

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 uses a specific verb ('Unfreeze') and a clear resource ('every frozen object in the scene'), making the tool's purpose immediately obvious. It also distinguishes this tool from siblings like freeze_objects and unhide_all by specifying the exact scope.

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 clear context for when to use the tool: when every frozen object in the scene needs to be unfrozen. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the action and scope are unambiguous enough for an agent to select it correctly.

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