Get a walkable pack demo layout

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

The description discloses the returned data in detail and implies a read-only 'Get' operation, but with no annotations it does not state side effects, authentication requirements, or failure behavior. It is transparent about output but not about operational behavior.

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 dense sentence that packs all relevant output fields, but it remains focused and avoids fluff. The length is justified by the amount of specific data returned.

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 output structure is well specified, which is important since there is no output schema. However, the description omits the meaning of the slug parameter and any error or edge-case behavior, leaving some context 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 only parameter, slug, is not explained in the description; the schema only provides pattern and length constraints. The description adds no semantic meaning about what slug refers to or how it should be supplied.

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 tool fetches one demo and enumerates its contents (pack, spawn point, walkable bounds, POIs, placements). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_demos, get_pack, and get_asset.

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 explains how to use the result ('Load the models with a plain GLTFLoader and apply the transforms'), but it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over list_demos or other alternatives. Usage guidance is implied rather than direct.

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