editor_set_video_player_param

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Set a property', implying mutation, but does not mention side effects (e.g., whether the scene file is modified, whether changes persist or apply only at runtime), required editor state, error behavior, or reversibility. This is a significant gap for a mutating tool.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It is appropriately concise with no filler or redundant information.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description is too minimal. It lacks information about what happens after the property is set, whether the editor needs to be running, how failures are reported, and whether the change is persistent or temporary. The schema provides parameter details, but the behavioral context is incomplete.

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 input schema already describes all three parameters with 100% coverage, including formats for value and node_path. The description itself adds no additional parameter semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate, though the schema's example property keys ('mass', 'energy') are inconsistent with a VideoStreamPlayer node, which the description does not clarify.

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 specific resource ('a VideoStreamPlayer node in the open scene'), which distinguishes it from sibling editor_set_*_param tools targeting other node types. The verb and resource are specific and non-tautological.

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 scope is implied by naming 'VideoStreamPlayer node in the open scene', but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like editor_set_node_properties or other editor_set_*_param tools. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, so usage guidance is only inferred.

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