write_path_curve

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses only that the operation writes a curve into a node, but does not state whether this overwrites existing curve data, mutates the scene file, or requires any particular scene state. The mutation is only implied by 'Write'.

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 with no filler or repetition; it communicates the operation efficiently.

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 schema richly documents all five parameters, and the description provides an adequate high-level purpose. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the description leaves gaps around side effects (e.g., overwriting curves, saving the scene) and the distinction from creating curves. It is minimally viable but not complete.

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 has 100% parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, but it does clarify the high-level relationship between scene_path, path, and points.

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 ('Write') and names the resource ('a curve into a Path2D/Path3D node in a scene'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_curve (which creates a curve resource) and read_path (which reads path data). It conveys the write-to-existing-node operation.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_curve, add_node, or modify_node, nor does it state prerequisites or exclusions. It merely implies a use case through its purpose statement.

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