Bootstrap ViperMesh Session

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool performs a Blender connectivity check and returns context plus suggested follow-up calls, but says nothing about failure behavior, latency, or whether the check is side-effect free.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the invocation rule and followed by the return content. No filler or repetition of the tool name.

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 an orchestration tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description should sketch the shape of the returned context. "Compact operating context" and "recommended next calls" gesture at it but leave the agent guessing what fields arrive.

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 there is no parameter semantics to explain; the baseline for a parameterless tool applies. Nothing in the description muddies that.

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 action and scope: it checks Blender and returns operating context plus recommended next calls for one persistent session. That distinguishes it reasonably from check_blender_connection, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

"Call once at session start" gives clear when-to-use guidance and implies the once-per-session constraint. It stops short of naming alternatives or stating when not to call it (e.g., mid-session refreshes).

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