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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: no behavior for a nonexistent or invalid sceneId, no error semantics, no note about what the returned scene contains. For a lookup tool whose output is undocumented, that is a real 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 single sentence is front-loaded and contains zero waste, which is good structure. However, the brevity crosses into under-specification for a tool with no output schema, so it is terse rather than optimally sized.

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?

This is a simple one-parameter read, and annotations cover the safety profile, but there is no output schema, so the description should at least indicate what a scene object contains or what happens on a missing ID. Neither is present, leaving the agent to call blind.

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 0%, so the description must carry the burden, and "by ID" only restates the parameter name sceneId. It gives no hint about ID format, valid range, or where to obtain a scene ID, adding essentially no meaning beyond the 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?

"Get a scene by ID" states a specific verb (get) and resource (scene) plus the lookup key, which distinguishes it from list_scenes. It does not differentiate further from sibling getters beyond the resource name, but the parallel naming convention makes the target resource unambiguous.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no statement of where the sceneId comes from (presumably list_scenes or create_scene), and no note about the alternative list_scenes. The ID-based framing implies the pattern, but nothing is stated.

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