editor_set_multiplayer_spawner_param

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It states a mutation ('Set a property') but does not mention side effects, whether the scene is saved, permissions required, error behavior for non-existent nodes or invalid properties, or any other behavioral traits. This lacks transparency for a write operation.

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 that is front-loaded with the verb and resource, no filler or redundant information. It is appropriately concise for a simple setter tool.

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?

The tool is relatively simple, and the schema covers all parameters. However, because there is no output schema and no annotations, the description does not disclose important behavioral aspects such as whether the operation is reversible, how errors are reported, or what the tool returns. For a mutation tool, this leaves some gaps in completeness, though the core function is adequately described.

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 three parameters (param, value, node_path) are each described with examples or additional context. The tool description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema—it just reinforces that the property belongs to a MultiplayerSpawner3D node, which is already evident from the tool name and schema.

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 resource ('MultiplayerSpawner3D node in the open scene'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools that target other node types. However, it does not specify which properties can be set beyond what the schema already indicates, so it is slightly less rich than the highest examples.

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 phrase 'in the open scene' indicates the tool operates on the currently open scene, giving some context. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus other editor_set_*_param tools, nor any exclusions or prerequisites beyond the implicit scene requirement.

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