guardar_escena

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the directory constraint, the overwrite refusal, and the irreversible nature of overwriting another scene, which is critical for a mutation tool. This goes well beyond a generic save statement.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose followed by necessary safety details. It contains no filler and does not redundantly repeat schema defaults beyond what 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?

For a simple 2-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is complete: it covers purpose, path scope, overwrite semantics, and undo risk. It does not need to explain return values because an output schema exists.

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 0%, but the description compensates by explaining 'sobrescribir=True' as the explicit overwrite opt-in and the ruta constraint as being under COPPELIA_DIRECTORIO_ESCENAS. The meaning of ruta as the target file path is implied by 'Guarda la escena actual en un .ttt'.

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 opens with 'Guarda la escena actual en un .ttt', naming a specific verb, resource, and output format. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like cargar_escena and cerrar_escena, which are load/close operations.

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?

It gives clear context for use (saving the current scene to a .ttt) and explicit operational guidance: it writes only under COPPELIA_DIRECTORIO_ESCENAS and refuses to overwrite unless sobrescribir=True. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions.

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