properties.report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It says 'report' but does not explicitly state it is read-only or non-destructive. It does not describe side effects, auth requirements, or what the output contains. The mention of 'live' hints at current state, but behavioral traits are insufficiently disclosed.

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 sentence that is concise and to the point. No unnecessary words. Front-loads the key action (report) and resource (properties). Every word 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?

Given the lack of output schema, no annotations, and many sibling tools, the description is minimal. It does not explain what 'live RNA properties' means, the format of the report, or how this tool relates to other report and property tools. For a complex domain like Blender RNA, this is insufficient for an agent to invoke the tool 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 0%, so the description must add meaning. It provides context for 'path' by describing it as a 'stable Properties path target', which aligns with the example in the title. However, the 'include_values' parameter is not mentioned at all in the description, thus no additional meaning beyond its title. The description partially improves understanding of one parameter but neglects the other.

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 states it reports all live RNA properties for a stable Properties path target. It uses a specific verb ('report') and resource ('live RNA properties'), and the mention of 'Properties path target' distinguishes it from other report tools that operate on specific object types like mesh or uv. However, the phrasing is somewhat technical and could be clearer for an AI 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling report tools (e.g., mesh.report, uv.report). No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions are provided. The description does not differentiate its purpose from other report tools or from 'properties.get'.

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