list_prims

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. 'List all prims' and the filter option describe the core behavior, but traversal semantics are ambiguous: 'root_path' could mean direct children, all descendants, or scene-wide listing with a filter. It also does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only.

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 compact, front-loaded with the main action, and uses a small structured Args block. Every line adds useful information without filler.

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 output schema likely covers return shape, so that gap is acceptable. However, with no annotations, no mention of traversal semantics, and two undocumented parameters, the description is not fully complete. It is adequate for a simple listing tool but leaves meaningful gaps.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must add the semantics itself. It explains root_path and prim_type well, including an example type, but completely omits command_id and idempotency_key, leaving those parameters unexplained in both the schema and description.

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 clear verb and resource: 'List all prims in the scene, optionally filtered by type.' It is not a tautology and clearly conveys what the tool does. However, it does not distinguish itself from neighboring tools like get_scene_info or get_prim_info.

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 usage through its parameter hints, especially 'root_path' and 'prim_type', but it never states when to use this tool versus related prim/scene inspection tools. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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