scene_list_prefabs

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the 'Read-only' sentence is redundant. However, the description adds real behavioral context beyond the annotations: it explains the fallback to the newest official save when mapPath is omitted, and notes that node graphs create prefabs at run time via f.createPrefab, implying this tool surfaces saved prefabs rather than runtime-spawned ones.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, then returned fields, then the default-source caveat, then a short script note. Every sentence carries information, though the f.createPrefab sentence is somewhat tangential to the act of listing and could be trimmed.

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 one-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, returned fields, and default behavior well. The remaining gaps, such as behavior on a missing or invalid map and whether the result can be empty, are minor for a simple list operation.

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 parameter's meaning. It does define what omitting mapPath does (reads the newest official save), which the bare string-typed schema does not. It still doesn't say what mapPath expects (file path format, absolute vs relative, what happens on an invalid path), so it falls short of a 5.

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 ('List the prefabs saved in a map') and enumerates the returned fields (id, name, asset, object/creature, scale). This clearly separates it from siblings like scene_add_prefab and scene_update_prefab, which mutate prefabs.

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 'Without mapPath it reads the newest official save' sentence tells the agent the default source, which is useful context. But it never explicitly says when to call this versus scene_add_prefab/scene_update_prefab, nor does it state preconditions beyond the default path behavior.

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