mmar_get_relationclass_instances

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the transparency burden. It indicates a read operation ('Get all') and adds helpful context that these are connections/edges. However, it does not disclose any potential side effects, authentication requirements, or error behavior. For a simple getter, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

A single, focused sentence that leads with the action and resource. No redundant words or restatement of the tool name. It front-loads the core purpose and clarifies domain jargon in parentheses.

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 single-parameter list-retrieval tool with no output schema, the description is complete enough: it names the input (scene instance) and the output (all relationclass instances). It could add details like return format or session requirements, but the explicit scope makes it sufficient for basic invocation.

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 schema covers the single parameter (scene_instance_uuid) with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to add parameter details. The description's mention of 'specific scene instance' aligns with the schema, but adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 identifies the action (get all relationclass instances) and the resource scope (within a specific scene instance), clarifying that these represent connections/edges in a diagram. This distinguishes it from the singular mmar_get_relationclass_instance and other retrieval tools.

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 when to use this tool: when you need all relationclass instances in a given scene instance. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like mmar_get_relationclass_instance, but the plural 'instances' and scene scoping provide enough contextual guidance for an agent.

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