set_scene_name

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

The description adds the scoping detail 'current scene', which clarifies which scene is affected. However, it does not elaborate on side effects beyond what the annotations already indicate (destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false). No contradiction with annotations.

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?

A single concise sentence that is front-loaded and earns its place. There is no wasted text, and the structure is appropriately minimal for a simple tool.

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 low-complexity tool with one parameter, output schema, and annotations covering destructive behavior, the description is reasonably complete. It states the target (current scene) and the action, though it could mention if the scene name must be unique or other constraints.

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 description coverage is 0%. The description does not explicitly explain the 'name' parameter, though it is clearly implied as the new scene name. No additional meaning beyond the schema's type and default is provided.

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 'Ganti nama scene saat ini' clearly states the tool renames the current scene, using a specific verb (rename) and resource (current scene). It is unambiguous but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, though no sibling tool for renaming scenes exists.

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 alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. It simply states what the tool does without contextualizing its use.

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