get_usd_variants

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

The verb 'Get' implies a safe read operation, but with no annotations and no output schema, the description does not disclose return format, error conditions, or whether the prim must exist. It offers only the minimal literal action.

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, efficient sentence that states the action and target, with no unnecessary words and the verb 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?

The description is too sparse for a tool with unannotated parameters and no output schema. It does not explain what the response looks like, the relationship between the two path parameters, or any edge cases.

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 no descriptions (0% coverage), and the description does not explain the 'path' and 'prim_path' parameters. While 'prim_path' is somewhat self-explanatory, 'path' is ambiguous, and the description adds no semantic clarity.

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 the verb 'Get' with a specific resource 'USD prim' and identifies the retrieved data ('variant sets and selections'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_usd_attribute or get_usd_prim_stats.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus other USD inspection tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, alternatives, or context, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name.

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