Create 3D scene

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true. The description adds context by explaining that the tool creates a new scene with components, optionally with instancing and control knobs. It does not contradict annotations and provides useful behavioral details beyond them.

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 two sentences, direct and front-loaded. It efficiently conveys the main purpose, components, key parameters, and usage hint without unnecessary words.

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 complexity (6 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the tool's purpose, what it builds, parameter effects, and a usage hint. It lacks mention of return value or error handling, but for a creation tool with good annotations, this is sufficient for most decisions.

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 coverage is 83%, and the description adds meaning to parameters like 'instances' (grid scattering), 'spin' (per-copy rotation over time), and 'scale_variation' (size randomness). It explains dependencies (e.g., 'needs instances > 1'), enhancing understanding beyond the schema alone.

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 'Build a renderable 3D scene' and lists specific components (Geometry COMP, Camera, Light, Render TOP, Null output). It distinguishes from sibling tools that are for audio-reactive, particle systems, etc., by focusing on a generic 3D scene creation.

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 calls it 'the starting point for 3D visuals' and hints at binding knobs to audio, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_3d_audio_reactive or create_generative_art. No when-not or alternative recommendations are provided.

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