unity_get_scene_infoGet active Unity scene details—name, path, dirty flag, root object count, build index—before querying its hierarchy.
Get the active scene: name, path, dirty flag, root object count, build index.
Use when: you need to know which scene is open before querying hierarchy.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond annotations by enumerating the returned fields (name, path, dirty flag, root count, build index), which helps an agent understand the payload without an output schema.
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 sentences with zero filler; the returned fields are front-loaded and the usage condition follows immediately. Every clause earns its place.
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 no-parameter, read-only, idempotent tool with full annotation coverage but no output schema, the description supplies the missing return-field detail and a clear usage trigger. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is absent.
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 takes zero parameters, so parameter semantics are moot and the baseline is 4. The description correctly does not waste space explaining inputs.
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 ('Get') and resource ('active scene'), then enumerates the exact fields returned: name, path, dirty flag, root object count, build index. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like unity_get_hierarchy or unity_get_object_info, which target different resources.
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?
Explicitly says 'Use when: you need to know which scene is open before querying hierarchy,' giving a concrete precondition. It does not name alternative sibling tools or state when-not to use it, but the context is clear enough for correct selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.