Save scene

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false), so the description only needs to add context. It clarifies the mode switch, which is useful, but says nothing about overwrite behavior, failure modes, or unsaved-changes implications. It does not contradict the annotations.

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?

One sentence, no filler, and the mode condition is front-loaded. Every clause 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?

For a one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what an agent must decide (in-place vs new path) and does not need to explain return values. It leaves overwrite/error semantics unstated, which is a minor gap.

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?

There is a single optional parameter and schema description coverage is 100% — the schema already states "Absolute .cv path for Save As. Omit to save in place." The description restates the same conditional without adding format or edge-case detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource (save the scene) and distinguishes the two operating modes: in-place save versus Save As when filePath is supplied. It is unambiguous, though it never names the natural counterpart, cavalry_open_scene, so sibling differentiation is only implicit.

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?

It gives a clear conditional: provide filePath for a new .cv path, omit it to overwrite the current file. That is enough for an agent to choose the right mode, but there is no guidance on when to prefer Save As over in-place saving, or what happens on an existing path.

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