blender.get_instances

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so well: it discloses ordering ('newest first'), the significance of statuses 'refused' and 'replaced,' and that the tool answers even when no Blender is connected. These are exactly the runtime traits an agent needs to interpret results correctly.

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?

Three tightly written sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and each subsequent sentence adds distinct behavioral or usage context.

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 that the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is complete enough for correct selection and invocation. It explains purpose, usage context, ordering, status semantics, and fallback behavior without needing to restate return fields.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly avoids implying any parameters, and the empty schema is fully covered.

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 Blender instances that have connected to this server, newest first.' It also distinguishes this tool from all siblings by explaining that the active instance is what every other tool acts on, so an agent can tell this is the connection-history tool rather than an object/scene tool.

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?

Provides clear context for when to call it: 'useful first call after a connection error,' and explains that the active instance is the target of every other tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name an alternative, but no sibling appears to serve the same purpose.

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