unity_graphics_scene_capture

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states the tool captures and returns an image, but does not mention potential side effects (e.g., if it modifies the scene), required conditions (e.g., a valid scene view), or authentication needs. For a simple read-like operation, the description is minimally adequate but lacks depth.

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 sentences, no filler. The first sentence states the primary action and output format; the second adds a use case. Information is front-loaded and every sentence adds value.

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?

Given the tool has 3 parameters (one optional) and no output schema or annotations, the description explains the return format (base64 PNG) and a common use case. However, it omits details about default dimensions (covered only in schema), error conditions, and requirements for a connected Unity instance. It is sufficient for a simple tool but could be more complete.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters (port, width, height) with descriptions including default values. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, earning a baseline score of 3.

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 it captures the Scene View as an inline image and returns a base64 PNG for direct viewing. The name and description together uniquely identify the tool's purpose among siblings like unity_screenshot_scene and unity_graphics_game_capture.

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 provides a brief use case ('visually inspect the scene layout') but does not differentiate from sibling tools such as unity_screenshot_scene, which may capture the same view. It lacks explicit when-to-use vs when-not-to-use guidance or alternative tool references.

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