roblox_studio

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds only the workflow hint about selecting IDs before edits; it says nothing about what 'state' returns, pagination, or session freshness.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler; the primary capability is stated first. The trailing workflow sentence is slightly cryptic but earns its place as the only usage guidance present.

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 output schema, the description is the only place return content could be described, yet 'inspect official Studio state' leaves the shape of that state opaque. For a read-only two-mode tool this is adequate but leaves an agent guessing about what list and state actually yield.

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 50%: the studio_id field carries its own description, and the enum values list/state are self-describing. The description echoes both modes but adds no meaning beyond the schema for either parameter — no detail on what an official Studio ID looks like or what the 'state' inspection returns. Baseline 3 for partial coverage.

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 states two specific verb+resource modes that map directly to the action enum: listing Studio/plugin sessions and inspecting official Studio state. It distinguishes the tool as a discovery/inspection entry point in a large sibling set (roblox_edit, roblox_query, etc.), though it doesn't explicitly name which sibling to use for edits.

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?

"Select explicit IDs before edits" implies a workflow prerequisite (resolve IDs here before mutating via another tool) but does not name the alternative edit tool or state an explicit when-not-to-use condition. Usage is inferable but not spelled out.

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