get_selected_actors

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower, yet the description still adds non-obvious behavior: it is 'Editor world only' and several unrelated tools mutate the selection as a side effect. The side-effect disclosure is exactly the kind of context an agent cannot infer from annotations alone.

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 with the core purpose, then usage, then the mutation caveat, then the return shape. Every sentence carries distinct, actionable information with no filler, and the inline Returns line compensates for the absent output schema.

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 zero-param read tool with no output schema, the description supplies the return shape, the editor-world scope limit, and the cross-tool side-effect warning. Nothing an agent needs to invoke or interpret this 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?

Zero parameters with 100% schema coverage, so the baseline of 4 applies; there is nothing parameter-wise for the description to add or compensate for. The stated return fields are a bonus rather than a parameter explanation.

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 (Read) and a precisely scoped resource (what is selected in the editor viewport/outliner right now), including the world it belongs to. An agent can distinguish this from selection-mutating siblings like select_actors or delete_actor 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 explicit when-to-use ('act on what the user just clicked without asking for names') and names the exact read-back relationship to select_actors / deselect_actors. It also warns to call this BEFORE delete_actor/duplicate_actor/copy_actors/move_actors_to_level rather than after, which is real routing guidance.

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