blender.get_objects

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the read-only listing nature, the page window semantics, and what "total"/"truncated" mean for deciding whether to page. It omits permission/authorization expectations and does not state reversibility (moot for a read), which keeps it just under a 5.

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 purpose sentence, then a tight per-parameter block, then the return/paging note. Every line earns its place and nothing is repeated or padded.

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 filtered, paginated list tool with five optional parameters the description covers purpose, sibling routing, all parameters, and pagination behavior; the output schema already handles the return shape, so nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 compensate fully, and it does: every one of the five parameters is explained with examples (""MESH", "CAMERA", "LIGHT""), semantics (case-insensitive substring, only objects linked to the collection), and constraints (limit 1-500, offset skip count). This adds real meaning beyond the bare property names and defaults.

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 objects") with the distinguishing scope ("with filters and a page window") and explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling blender.get_scene for large scenes. An agent can tell it apart from get_scene/get_object without opening any schema.

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 a clear usage condition: use this when the scene is too large for blender.get_scene to be useful, and the paging fields tell the agent when to request the next page. It does not mention other plausible alternatives (e.g. blender.get_object for a single object, blender.get_instances), so it falls short of naming explicit when-not cases.

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