scene_get_level_settings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's 'Read-only' adds nothing. Where it does add value is the fallback behavior: without mapPath it silently resolves to the newest official save, which is non-obvious and would otherwise surprise an agent.

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?

Two compact sentences with no filler: the first front-loads what is read and which fields it returns, the second carries the default-path behavior and read-only note. Nothing could be cut without losing information.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description correctly compensates by naming the returned settings, and it covers the default resolution path. Only the mapPath value format is left unspecified, a minor gap given list_maps exists as a sibling.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the only parameter's meaning, and it does: mapPath is optional and defaulting to the newest official save is spelled out. It does not say what form a mapPath takes (absolute path, map name, or ID), which is the remaining gap.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (read level settings) and enumerates exactly what is returned: aggroMode, aggro transfer multiplier, level clock hour and speed. This distinguishes it cleanly from the sibling scene_set_level_settings, which writes the same settings.

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?

Gives one useful usage rule — omit mapPath to read the newest official save — which tells the agent when the parameter can be skipped. It does not explain when to prefer this tool over related inspection tools such as inspect_map, nor any exclusions, so guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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