studio_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation and the description lists the returned data categories, which is useful. However, it does not explain behavior when no active session exists, the output format, or what 'plugin status' precisely means.

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, focused sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, then lists the specific data returned, earning every word.

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 information tool, the description adequately covers the target resource and the expected output fields. It could mention error conditions or clarify 'plugin status,' but those are minor for a simple getter without an output schema.

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 the schema coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter semantics burden on the description. This matches the baseline of 4 for tools with no parameters.

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 clearly states the specific action ('Get information') and resource ('active Roblox Studio session'), and enumerates the returned fields: place ID, place name, mode, and plugin status. It is distinct from list_roblox_studios but does not explicitly differentiate from similar siblings like get_studio_state or mode_get.

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?

There is no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like mode_get, get_studio_state, list_roblox_studios, and set_active_studio exist, but the description does not mention them or provide exclusion criteria. Usage is only implied by the phrase 'active Roblox Studio session.'

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