imgui_switch_scene

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. The description reveals the key behavioral trait: switching scenes hides windows from other scenes ('showing only its windows'). However, it doesn't disclose side effects like whether the current scene's state is preserved, whether the scene must already exist (vs implicitly created), or what happens if the named scene doesn't exist.

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 concise sentence that delivers purpose and primary behavioral effect. Zero wasted 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?

For a single-parameter tool with a clear purpose, the description is mostly adequate. However, given there are no annotations and no output schema, some additional context about error behavior (unknown scene name), state preservation, or relationship to other scene-management tools would improve completeness. The tool is simple enough that this is a minor gap rather than a critical one.

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's only one parameter (name), and the schema description covers it 100% ('Scene name to activate'). The description's 'named scene' aligns with the parameter meaning, but adds no additional detail beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, baseline 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 states the verb (switch) and resource (scene) clearly: 'Switch to a named scene, showing only its windows.' This clearly differentiates from sibling scene tools like imgui_create_scene, imgui_delete_scene, and imgui_list_scenes, which have different purposes. The behavior of 'showing only its windows' adds scoping context.

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 it (to activate a scene and hide other scenes' windows), but doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or reference alternatives. Sibling tools like imgui_set_window_visibility achieve similar effects for individual windows, but no explicit guidance is given about choosing between them.

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