get_selection

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the action without disclosing behavioral details such as the return format (e.g., array of object names, handles), side effects (none expected), or any system-specific behavior. The description does not contradict annotations (there are none), but it fails to go beyond the bare minimum.

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?

A single, well-formed sentence that front-loads the action and resource without any redundant words. Ideal conciseness for a simple read operation.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what the tool returns. It only says 'objects,' leaving the return format unspecified (e.g., names, IDs, full objects). This is a notable gap for an agent trying to interpret the result. Otherwise, the description is adequate for a parameterless tool.

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 has zero parameters, so the schema covers everything. The description adds no parameter info, but none is needed. Baseline 4 is appropriate given no parameters exist.

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 the verb 'get' and the resource 'objects currently selected in the 3ds Max viewport,' which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'select' that would set the selection. The purpose is immediately obvious.

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 purpose implies usage: it fetches the current selection. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'select' for changing selection), nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. For such a simple tool, the implied usage is acceptable but not explicit.

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