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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers safety, so the description adds useful behavior beyond that: it discloses the API key requirement, scopes results to the connected account, and names the returned fields. Pagination or list limits are not mentioned, but this is a minor gap for a zero-parameter read 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 delivers action, resource, scope, output fields, and auth requirement in that order. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail.

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 read-only list tool, the description is nearly complete: it identifies the auth requirement, the scope, and the fields returned. The main omission is any note about pagination or result limits, which could matter for accounts with many scenes.

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 schema is trivially complete and the description does not need to compensate. The baseline of 4 applies because there are no parameters whose meaning could be clarified.

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 opens with the specific verb 'List' and identifies a clear resource: scenes in the connected Keyframer account. It also names the returned fields, making it easy to distinguish from siblings like get_scene, create_scene, and update_scene.

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 implies this is the default way to enumerate scenes in the account, but it does not explicitly state when to choose list_scenes over get_scene or search_recipes. It also provides no exclusion conditions or alternative routing.

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