Retrieve a specific scene by ID using the authenticated Cartwheel service account. Get scene details for inspection or integration into your animation workflow.
Retrieves a scene accessible to the authenticated service account.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sceneID | Yes | The scene ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare this tool as read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world, so the description carries a lighter burden. It adds the useful context that access is limited to scenes the service account can access, but it does not describe behavior for missing or inaccessible scenes.
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?
The description is a single, well-structured sentence that communicates the core action and access scope with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a tool with one parameter and a straightforward purpose.
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 simple, read-only retrieval tool with a fully documented single parameter and strong annotations, the description is largely sufficient. It does not specify the return payload or error behavior, but the absence of an output schema and the simplicity of the operation make this a minor gap rather than a critical one.
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 schema already documents the single sceneID parameter with type, example, and description, giving 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional meaning about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score is appropriate.
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 states a specific verb ('Retrieves') and a clear resource ('a scene'), making the tool's function immediately understandable. It also adds the scoping qualifier 'accessible to the authenticated service account,' which helps distinguish it from broader scene-listing tools like list_scenes.
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 implies this tool should be used when retrieving a single scene by ID, especially given the required sceneID parameter. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over list_scenes or other sibling tools, nor does it state any exclusions or alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.