Get Scene Hierarchy

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond that: it discloses pagination behavior and enumerates the returned envelope fields (total, count, offset, items, has_more, next_offset), which is more than the annotations provide.

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?

Front-loads the one-line purpose, then args, then usage and return shape; every sentence is functional. The Args block partly duplicates the schema descriptions, which is mild redundancy but aids fast scanning.

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?

With no output schema, the description takes on the burden of describing the return: a markdown list plus a structured object with total/count/offset/items/has_more/next_offset. Combined with the pagination parameters and usage routing, an agent has everything needed to call and consume the result correctly.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds semantics beyond the schema: it specifies that root_only=false surfaces one level of children under a 'children' key, whereas the schema only says 'include full tree'. That added precision is useful, though it also slightly diverges from the schema wording.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List root GameObjects of the active scene') plus scope qualifiers (components summary, paginated). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling search tool, so an agent can route without opening either schema.

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?

'Use when: exploring what is in the scene' gives the positive trigger, and 'For search use unity_find_gameobjects' names the alternative and the condition that selects it. Both when-to-use and when-to-use-something-else are present.

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