list_objects

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clarifies the read-only listing behavior implicitly and states what is returned (name, type, location) and that an empty string returns everything, which is meaningful context. It omits any note about permissions, ordering, or performance on large scenes.

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?

Short, front-loaded, and cleanly partitioned into Args and Returns sections. Every sentence carries information; no filler.

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 zero-required-parameter read tool this is essentially complete: the filter semantics are explained and the return shape is noted, and an output schema exists so return detail need not be expanded. Only the absence of usage routing keeps it from being fully self-sufficient.

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%, so the description must compensate and largely does: it explains the filter's purpose, gives example enum values (MESH, LIGHT, CAMERA, EMPTY), and specifies the empty-string default behavior. It does not enumerate the full enum but the schema already supplies that list.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List all objects in the scene') plus the scope of the optional filter. It is clearly distinguishable from mutating siblings like delete_object or create_object, though it never names the closest alternatives (get_object_info, get_scene_info) to disambiguate.

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?

No explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives are named. The reader can infer it is the enumeration tool versus get_object_info (single-object detail), but the description leaves that inference entirely to the agent.

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