blender_msfs_livery_get_template_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, and the mention of 'texture sizes and UV regions' gives some indication of the returned content, but it does not disclose prerequisites, failure modes, or whether any scene state is modified.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the main purpose and adds specific useful details. There is no wasted wording or repetition.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and a clear purpose, so the description covers the basics. However, with no output schema and no usage guidance, the agent is left to infer the exact return structure and how this tool fits into the livery workflow.

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 description for aircraft_id is complete with an example and explanation, so schema coverage is 100%. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond echoing the schema, so the baseline score 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 states a specific action ('Get detailed template information') on a clear resource ('an aircraft') and specifies the key content ('texture sizes and UV regions'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like livery_download_template or livery_load_template_overlay.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus related alternatives such as blender_msfs_livery_get_aircraft_templates or blender_msfs_livery_download_template. The intended context is only implied by the wording, with no explicit exclusions or selection criteria.

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