get_selected_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 of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Get' clearly indicates a read-only operation, and 'currently selected objects in InDesign' explains what state is being read. However, it does not disclose what happens with no selection or multiple selections, nor what shape the returned 'information' takes.

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 two short sentences with no filler or restatement of the tool name. The first sentence states the exact action and resource, and the second adds a practical usage context, making it well-structured and front-loaded.

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 zero-parameter getter, the core invocation is clear, and the text-frame usage context is helpful. But with no output schema and no annotations, the description should specify what 'information' is returned (for example, object IDs, types, or bounds) and how no-selection cases are handled. As written, it is minimally viable but incomplete.

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 input schema has zero properties, so there are no parameters for the description to document. The phrase 'currently selected' effectively communicates that the tool relies on the active InDesign selection state rather than explicit arguments, which is the only parameter-like context needed 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 uses a clear getter verb and scopes the resource to 'currently selected objects in InDesign,' which is distinct from listing all text frames or getting document info. The text-frame note adds a concrete workflow, but the description does not explicitly contrast it with sibling selection/text tools like get_text_content or fix_typography_in_selection.

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 second sentence gives an explicit context: 'ESSENTIAL for working with user-selected text frames.' This tells an agent when this tool is relevant and signals that it operates on the user's current selection. It stops short of 5 because it does not mention when not to use it or name alternatives.

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