get_scene_tree

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It correctly implies a read-only operation ('Get') but omits details like whether it modifies state, returns the entire tree or a subset, or any side effects. The statement is accurate but minimally informative.

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, well-formed sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's function without redundant words. It is front-loaded with the primary action, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 simple read tool, the description is somewhat complete but lacks contextual cues about typical usage patterns or integration with other tools. The absence of an output schema and detailed behavioral information leaves gaps for an agent to fully understand the tool's role.

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 input schema covers all parameters with descriptions, so the description adds no extra meaning. The description does not elaborate on parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, resulting in a baseline score.

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 action ('Get'), the output format ('JSON representation'), and the specific resource ('node tree in a scene'), making its purpose unmistakable. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on the tree structure rather than individual nodes or other operations.

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 the many alternative sibling tools, such as add_node or remove_node. Without context on prerequisites or scenarios (e.g., for visualization vs. editing), the agent lacks direction for selection.

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