mmar_get_class_instances

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only states the core operation and scope, but omits the return format, potential empty results, error conditions, or any session/auth requirements. This leaves a significant transparency gap.

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 directly states the purpose with no redundant words. Every part earns its place, and the parenthetical clarifications aid comprehension without bloating the text.

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 one-parameter getter, the description sufficiently covers purpose and scope. However, it does not explicitly mention the shape of the return value (e.g., an array of class instances), which would be useful given the absence of an output schema. Still, the operation is straightforward and the siblings provide context.

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 input schema fully describes the sole parameter 'scene_instance_uuid' with type and format. The description adds the clarifying synonym 'diagram' for scene instance, which is helpful, but does not add substantial semantics beyond what the schema already provides. With 100% schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 action (Get), the resource (all class instances), and the scope (within a specific scene instance). It distinguishes itself from the singular variant mmar_get_class_instance and from relationclass instances, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 the use case of retrieving all class instances in a diagram and provides the key scoping parameter. While it does not explicitly exclude alternatives like mmar_get_class_instance or mmar_get_relationclass_instances, the plural 'all' and the scene-instance scoping make the context clear.

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