get_scene_summary

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation ('get'), but does not explicitly state that the scene is not modified or describe any potential caveats (e.g., performance cost, freshness of data). It does specify the output contents, which adds some transparency, but falls short of fully disclosing behavior.

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, well-structured sentence that immediately states the purpose and key information included. It is front-loaded with the core action ('Get a high-level summary') and adds just enough detail (node counts, frame info) without unnecessary words.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is fairly complete: it tells the agent what to expect (node counts, frame info). However, it does not clarify how this summary relates to other overview tools in the sibling set (e.g., get_scene_info), which would help an agent choose among them. Still, the core information is present, so it is slightly above adequate.

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, and the schema coverage is trivially 100% (empty properties). The description does not need to explain parameter semantics since there are none. Baseline of 4 is appropriate for a parameter-less tool.

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 the tool's function: retrieving a high-level summary of the scene, with specific contents (node counts by category, frame info). The verb 'get' and resource 'scene summary' are explicit, and the inclusion of 'node counts by category' and 'frame info' differentiates it from more detailed or focused tools like get_scene_info or get_geo_summary.

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 such as get_scene_info or get_network_overview. There are no usage scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions mentioned, leaving the agent to guess when this summary is appropriate.

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