editor_set_marker_param

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Set a property' without mentioning side effects, whether the scene is modified on disk, what happens if the node doesn't exist, or any error behavior. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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, focused sentence that immediately states the action and target. There is no redundant or misplaced information, making it highly concise and efficient.

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 simplicity, the schema plus description cover the parameters and basic operation. However, the lack of annotations and absence of any note about prerequisites (beyond 'open scene'), return values, or failure modes leaves the description somewhat incomplete for an agent to fully anticipate the tool's behavior.

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%, with each parameter having a clear description (e.g., param examples, value format as GDScript literal, node_path in the open scene). The tool description itself adds no extra parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('Set a property') and the target ('Marker node in the open scene'), which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like editor_set_area_param or editor_set_camera_param by explicitly naming Marker nodes.

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 usage context is implied by the node type: use when setting a Marker property in the open scene. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives (e.g., other editor_set_*_param tools), so guidance is only moderate.

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