List scenes

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds valuable behavioral context: scene_id stability across rename/reorder, invalidation on collection switch, and the emitted event.scenes_changed with reason 'collection_switched'. This discloses important side effects and data behavior not apparent from annotations alone.

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 sentences with no fluff. The first sentence states the primary function and output format; the second adds essential behavioral nuance. Both sentences earn their place, and the description is front-loaded with the action.

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 list tool, the description is complete: it covers scope (active collection), output structure, and the key caveat about id stability and collection switches. No output schema exists, so the description correctly fills the gap by specifying the return format.

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 no parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description doesn't need to add parameter semantics. It focuses on return format and behavior instead, which is appropriate.

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 'List all scenes in DualStream's active collection' with a specific verb and resource, and specifies the return format. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_active_scene and create_scene by emphasizing 'all scenes' and the active collection scope.

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 context is clear: use this to list all scenes in the active collection. While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, the 'all scenes' phrasing implies a contrast with targeted tools like get_active_scene. The scope is well-defined, but no explicit 'when not to use' is given.

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