get_usd_prim_metadata

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond the annotations: entries above 100 collapse to count plus a note, and unsupported value types are downgraded to a placeholder string. These truncation and coercion caveats are exactly the kind of operational detail an agent needs and annotations cannot express.

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?

Dense but efficient: the mode behavior and the caveats come first, then a compact return shape. The sentence structure is slightly run-on, but every clause carries information and nothing is 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?

With no formal output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the return object fields (present, key, value, metadata, count, note). For a read-only three-parameter tool with full annotation coverage, this is nearly complete; only the stage_name resolution nuance is left to the schema.

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 key, prim_path, and stage_name. The description largely restates the key semantics ('empty or omitted returns all entries') and adds the {type, value} value shape, but contributes little beyond the schema's own field descriptions.

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: 'Read the metadata of a prim on a registered USD stage,' with the key/no-key modes spelled out. It is clearly distinguishable in intent from mutation siblings like set_usd_prim_metadata, though it never names the neighboring read tools (get_usd_prim_info, list_usd_prim_attributes) to route the agent.

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 explains the two modes (single key vs all entries) but gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no reference to alternative read tools. The agent must infer selection criteria between this and siblings like get_usd_attribute_value on its own.

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