scene_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It explicitly guarantees the tool does not mutate the MD scene, which is the key side-effect disclosure for a scene-info operation. It does not discuss return format or performance, but for a no-parameter info tool this is solid disclosure.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the substantive output summary and followed by the safety guarantee. There is no filler or redundant phrasing.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description fully covers what the agent needs: the data categories returned and the non-mutating behavior. Nothing essential is missing for correct selection and invocation.

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, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters; it instead clarifies what information will be produced, which is the only relevant semantic content.

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 identifies a clear resource and scope: project/version info plus pattern and fabric counts for the MD scene. It stops short of a 5 because it lacks an explicit retrieval verb and does not distinguish itself from sibling info tools such as project_info or environment_info.

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 non-mutation statement implies this is a safe, read-only tool to call when a scene summary is needed. However, it never states when to prefer this over alternative info tools, leaving routing to the agent's inference.

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