get_game_scene_tree

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the tool retrieves the runtime scene tree but does not mention side effects, permissions, rate limits, or whether it is safe. The description is too minimal to adequately inform the agent of behavioral traits.

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 a clear warning emoji. It is extremely concise and front-loaded, containing no unnecessary words. Every part adds value.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description covers the essential point: it retrieves the runtime scene tree with a prerequisite. It could hint at the return format (tree structure), but for a basic tool this is sufficient. The sibling 'get_scene_tree' hints at the runtime distinction, but the description is complete enough for agent use.

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 schema coverage is 100%. The description adds context that the game must be running, which is not parameter-specific but useful. For zero-parameter tools, the baseline is 4, and the description does not detract.

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 retrieves the scene tree of a running game, distinguishing it from the sibling 'get_scene_tree' which likely targets the editor tree. The verb 'Get' and resource 'scene tree' are specific, and the runtime context is explicit.

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 a clear prerequisite: the game must be running. This guides the agent on when to invoke the tool. However, it does not mention when not to use it or alternative tools, leaving some ambiguity.

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