selection_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states that this is a read-only operation returning the current selection, which is the essential behavior. It does not mention edge cases like an empty selection or return format, but for a simple getter with no parameters, the disclosure is adequate.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every token adds meaning: the verb, the resource, the temporal qualifier 'currently', and the environment 'Roblox Studio'.

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 zero-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, this description is fully complete. It tells the agent exactly what the tool returns (the list of Instances currently selected) and contains all information needed to invoke it correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. The description correctly adds no parameter-related information because none is needed.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and clearly identifies the resource: the list of Instances currently selected by the developer. It is unambiguous and naturally distinguishes itself from sibling tools like selection_set, selection_add, and selection_clear, which are mutations rather than reads.

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 intended use is implied by the verb 'Get' and the resource description, but there is no explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance. An agent can infer that this is the read counterpart to selection_set/add/clear from the name and description, but no direct comparison or exclusion is stated.

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