maya_scene_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool returns summary info including unit system, up axis, frame range, selection state, and node counts, and it warns about coordinate misplacement if units/up axis are unknown. This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond a simple 'get info' statement, though it does not explicitly confirm non-destructive behavior (which is strongly implied).

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 two compact sentences: the first states the tool's action, the second provides usage guidance and justification. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 zero-parameter info tool, the description is fully complete. It enumerates the returned information (units, up axis, frame range, selection, node counts) and explains the practical use case. Since there is no output schema, the description adequately covers return value semantics.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema provides complete coverage (100%). The description doesn't need to explain parameters; the baseline score of 4 applies since there is nothing to clarify.

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 states the tool's function: '현재 씬의 요약 정보를 가져옵니다' (gets summary info of the current scene), specifying both the action and the resource. It also lists the specific information provided (units, up axis, frame range, selection state, node counts), making it distinct from sibling tools like maya_execute or maya_viewport_capture.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: '작업을 시작하기 전에 한 번 호출해서... 파악하세요' (call once before starting work to understand the scene). It also explains why this is important—knowing units and up axis prevents placing objects in wrong coordinates—which serves as a clear rationale for using this tool first.

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