get_selection

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a safe read and hints that results are 'paths', but says nothing about behavior when nothing is selected, the return shape, or whether it requires an active Studio session.

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?

A single short sentence with the key information front-loaded and no filler. It is arguably under-specified rather than bloated, so it stays efficient.

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 trivial zero-arg read tool with no output schema, the description gives the minimum viable picture. It leaves the actual return type (list of path strings vs instance references) unstated, which is the main remaining gap.

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?

Zero parameters, which is the baseline-4 case. The description correctly implies no arguments are needed and adds no misleading parameter claims.

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?

Specific verb+resource: 'Get current Studio selection' clearly states it retrieves the active selection, and the '(paths)' hint narrows the semantics. It does not explicitly name the inverse sibling set_selection, but the get/set verb pairing makes the distinction obvious to an agent.

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 on when to use this versus alternatives such as get_scene or get_instance, nor any prerequisite or state requirement (e.g. a place must be open). Usage is only implied by the verb.

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