get_scene_summary

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

The annotations already establish that this is a read-only, closed-world operation, so the description does not need to repeat safety traits. It adds useful disclosure of the returned categories, such as counts, dimensions, layers, code blocks, and text contents, but it does not mention prerequisites such as whether a scene must already be loaded.

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 definition is a single well-formed sentence with the purpose front-loaded. The parenthetical list is purposeful because it enumerates the kinds of summary data the agent can expect.

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 no-parameter, read-only summary tool with an output schema, the description provides enough context to understand what it returns. A brief note distinguishing it from the fuller scene and description tools would make it complete.

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, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. The empty schema is consistent with the description, which frames the tool as taking no input and returning a summary.

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 gives a specific verb-resource pair: it returns structured numerical metrics and topological metadata for a scene. It clearly conveys that this is a summary-oriented read operation, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings such as get_scene or describe_scene.

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 phrase 'for layout planning' implies the usage context, which is helpful but not a full when-to-use rule. It does not state when to choose this tool over get_scene, get_element, or describe_scene, leaving the agent to infer the distinction from the names.

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