get_scene_tree

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

With no annotations, the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits beyond the basic action. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, what nodes are included, or any side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's impact.

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, which is concise, but it lacks structure and important details. It could be improved with a brief note on usage context (e.g., 'for the currently open scene') to enhance clarity.

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 claims the tool retrieves the tree of a 'specified or currently open scene', but the input schema has no parameter for specifying a scene, only 'max_depth'. This contradiction indicates incompleteness. Additionally, there is no explanation of return format or behavior, which would be expected given no output schema.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'max_depth', so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's own parameter description.

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 node tree of a scene, using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not distinguish from the sibling tool 'get_game_scene_tree', which also retrieves a scene tree but likely from the running game rather than the editor.

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 alternatives like 'get_game_scene_tree' or other scene analysis tools. The description lacks usage context or exclusions.

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