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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotations by stating that the active scene is where tokens and combat currently happen, and by listing the returned fields. There is no contradiction between description and annotations.

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 two concise sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the operation and return values, and the second sentence provides the usage purpose, making the most important information front-loaded.

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 simple, parameterless read-only list tool, the description is complete: it identifies what is returned, why the tool should be used, and what the active scene concept means. Annotations cover safety and idempotency, and no output schema is needed because the returned fields are explicitly listed.

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 has zero parameters, so the description carries no parameter documentation burden. The schema coverage is 100% because the schema is empty, matching the baseline for a no-parameter 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List all scenes in the world' and enumerates the exact fields returned (id, name, active status, background image path). It also names the downstream tools scene-get and scene-activate, giving the tool a clear purpose distinct from those siblings.

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 an explicit use case: 'Use to find scene IDs for scene-get or scene-activate.' It also clarifies the meaning of the active scene. It does not explicitly list when not to use it, but for a parameterless list tool this is a minor gap.

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