get_usd_prim_stats

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose 'NO_UNDO' and that responses pass through 'apply_response_cap', which are useful behavioral traits. However, it does not mention permissions, side effects, or whether the stage must be cooked, leaving significant gaps.

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 very short and front-loaded with the key output fields, making it easy to scan. However, the mixed-language shorthand and technical jargon (e.g., 'apply_response_cap') reduce clarity, and the second sentence adds operational detail without full context.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description only enumerates output categories without detailing the response structure. It also omits any explanation of required parameters or preconditions, leaving the tool under-specified for an agent to confidently invoke it.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the roles of ctx, node_path, or prim_path. While prim_path is inferable from the tool's purpose, ctx and node_path are undefined and the description adds no parameter-level meaning.

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 lists what is reported: active/loaded/defined/abstract/instance status and attribute count, which clearly identifies the tool's purpose. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_prim_intrinsics or get_usd_attribute by focusing on prim state statistics, though it lacks a formal verb phrase.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_prim_intrinsics, get_geo_summary, or lop_prim_get. The mention of 'add-usd-solaris-tools' gives provenance but not usage context or exclusions.

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