shaderfx-report

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read-only reporting action but does not explain what 'live RNA properties' means, whether the operation has side effects, or what the output format is. Minimal behavioral context is provided beyond the verb 'Report'.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the core action and scope without unnecessary elaboration.

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 simple report tool with no output schema, the description should clarify what properties are reported and how the 'object' parameter is used. It does neither, leaving the agent without enough context to invoke the tool confidently. The phrase 'live RNA properties' is jargon that is not expanded.

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 compensate. It partially explains the 'name' parameter via 'one or all shader effects', but the required 'object' parameter is not mentioned at all. The description adds only marginal meaning beyond the schema's bare titles.

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 uses a specific verb ('Report') and resource ('live RNA properties') with clear scope ('one or all shader effects'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like shaderfx-list and shaderfx-set by focusing on reporting properties rather than listing or modifying.

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 usage for inspecting shader effect properties, but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives such as shaderfx-list or shaderfx-report. No exclusions or alternative tool names are mentioned, leaving the context only implied.

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