scene-info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It hints at read-only behavior ('summarize') but doesn't disclose specifics like whether it returns a high-level overview or detailed lists, or if it includes other scene elements like lights or cameras. It's adequate but minimal.

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?

The description is a single, concise sentence that conveys the essential purpose. No wasted words, perfectly front-loaded.

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, the description is reasonably complete but could be richer. It doesn't specify what 'summarize' includes (e.g., names, properties, counts) or whether it affects the scene (likely not, but not explicitly stated). Given its simplicity, it meets the minimum viable bar.

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?

Since there are 0 parameters and schema coverage is 100% (empty), the description doesn't need to compensate for params. The baseline is 4 for 0-param tools, and the description confirms it's a simple report action.

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 clearly states the tool summarizes the current scene's objects and materials, which is specific enough. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like 'properties-report' or 'shading-report' which might also provide scene-related summaries.

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 description implies when to use it (to get a scene summary) but doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives or mention when not to use it. Siblings like 'project-report' or 'context-info' might overlap, yet no guidance is provided.

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