Get Scene List

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

Annotations already declare the call read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond that—for example, what the returned list contains, whether it respects a scene collection/canvas scope, or how omitted canvasUuid behaves. It does not contradict annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is concise and immediately scannable.

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 read-only tool with one well-described optional parameter, this is minimally usable, but there are gaps: no output schema means the agent is not told the shape or contents of the returned scene list, and the optional canvas parameter's omission semantics are not explained. Sibling differentiation is also absent.

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 coverage is 100% and the single canvasUuid parameter has a clear inline description, so the schema carries the meaning. The tool description itself does not discuss parameters, but no compensation is needed; however it also does not add extra nuance about required/optional behavior.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Get a list of scenes'), so the core purpose is clear. It does not distinguish itself from sibling tools such as obs-get-scene-items or obs-get-current-scene, nor does it mention the canvas-scoped behavior implied by the schema.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided; the description only restates the operation. The sibling tool list contains related scene methods (obs-get-scene-items, obs-get-current-scene, obs-set-current-scene), and this description gives the agent no criteria for choosing this one over them.

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