get_usd_variants

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

The description mentions 'NO_UNDO' as a behavioral trait, which is useful, but with no annotations it fails to disclose whether the operation is read-only, what side effects it has, or any permissions needed. The reference to 'apply_response_cap' is obscure and adds little clarity.

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 but it is under-specified, containing cryptic metadata like 'add-usd-solaris-tools' and 'apply_response_cap' that do not help an agent. It lacks a clean front-loaded purpose statement.

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 annotations, no output schema, and a terse description, the tool is severely under-documented. The description does not explain what the function returns, how the parameters relate, or any operational details.

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?

All three parameters (ctx, node_path, prim_path) have 0% schema description coverage and the tool description does not explain them. An agent has no way to know what each parameter means or how to fill them.

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 mentions 'variant set name and current selection', which hints at the tool's output, but it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'retrieve'. It is vague but more informative than a tautology, so it partially conveys the purpose.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus other getters like get_usd_attribute or lop_prim_get. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or alternative tools.

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