scene_get_tree

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

Without annotations, the description discloses return type (JSON with node tree), and explains max_depth behavior (-1 for unlimited). It does not mention side effects, but as a read operation, this is acceptable.

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 concise, structured with a category, Args, and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple (3 params, no nested objects), and the description covers purpose, parameters, and return structure. An output schema exists, so return details need not be exhaustive. The description is complete for an agent to use the 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully explains all parameters: project_path, scene_path, and max_depth (including default and special value -1). This adds substantial meaning beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states 'Get the node tree structure of a scene', which is a specific verb-resource pair. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like scene_create or scene_save by clearly focusing on reading the tree structure.

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 provides clear context (reading scene tree structure) but does not explicitly state when to avoid using it or mention alternative tools. However, the purpose is straightforward and distinct from siblings.

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