list_usd_prims

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

No annotations exist, and the description only repeats the action 'list' without disclosing return format, side effects, or constraints. It does not explain that it is a read-only operation or how it handles the root_prim and max_depth parameters beyond what the schema already shows.

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 sentence with no filler, making it highly concise and front-loaded. Every word adds value, though it is under-specified in content.

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 USD listing tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description lacks essential context such as what 'path' refers to, whether traversal is recursive, and what the response looks like. It is minimally viable but insufficient for an agent to invoke correctly without additional inference.

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 description adds minimal meaning by mentioning 'depth' which maps to max_depth, but it does not explain the semantics of 'path' or 'root_prim', despite 0% schema description coverage. This fails to compensate for the schema's lack of parameter documentation.

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 lists USD prims up to a specified depth, using a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from Houdini geometry prim tools by specifying 'USD prims'.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_prim_intrinsics or get_prims. The description only states what it does, not when it should be chosen.

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