get_objects_summary

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description's 'Ringkasan' (summary) aligns with a read operation. The description adds scope (entire scene, per object) but does not disclose what the summary contains (e.g., dimensions, hierarchy, statistics), leaving some uncertainty about the output.

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 concise phrase in Indonesian, front-loaded with the key idea. It is efficient with no wasted words, though it could benefit from a bit more structure (e.g., a sentence) to separate the purpose from scope.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (zero params, read-only) and presence of an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, with many sibling tools that could overlap (get_scene_info, scene_summary, get_object_detail_summary), it does not fully disambiguate what type of summary is returned, making it less complete than it could be.

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 the description does not need to explain parameter semantics. The schema coverage is effectively 100% (vacuously), and the baseline for 0 params is 4, which is appropriate here.

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 'Ringkasan per objek seluruh scene' (Summary per object of the entire scene) clearly indicates this tool returns a summary of objects in the scene. It distinguishes from siblings like get_scene_info and scene_summary by specifying 'per objek' (per object), though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 'seluruh scene' (entire scene) and 'per objek' (per object) provide clear context for when to use this tool: when needing an overview of all objects rather than a single object or high-level scene info. However, it does not mention when not to use it or explicitly reference alternatives.

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