search_scene_node_assets

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It conveys that this is a read-only search over installed local assets, which is useful context. However, it does not mention filtering, result behavior, or any side effects, though the 'search' verb makes destructive behavior unlikely.

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 with no filler or redundant wording. Every word adds meaning, and it is appropriately sized for a simple search tool.

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 an optional-parameter search tool with an output schema, this is nearly adequate: an agent can safely invoke it with no arguments and interpret the result from the schema. The main gaps are missing parameter semantics and the lack of any explicit relationship to sibling search or inspection tools.

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% and the description mentions none of the three parameters. Query, category, and limit are somewhat self-explanatory from their names, but the description adds no guidance on how query matches assets, what category values are accepted, or how limit applies.

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 states a clear action ('Search') on a specific resource ('installed Scene Nodes NodeTemplate assets'). It adds 'NodeTemplate' and 'installed' beyond the tool name, narrowing scope and distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_capsule_assets and describe_scene_node_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 phrasing implies this tool should be used to find installed Scene Nodes NodeTemplate assets, but it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. The agent can infer the intended context, but the description does not say 'use this instead of search_capsule_assets' or explain when a direct asset description would be better.

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