Nsc Summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. The word "List" weakly implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive, side-effect-free, or what permissions are needed. Behavioral disclosure is minimal.

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 filler or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for a zero-parameter summary tool. Every word contributes to identifying the operation.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimally adequate. It identifies the operation but does not explain what "common properties" are returned or provide usage context relative to sibling NSC tools. This leaves clear gaps, though invocation itself is unambiguous.

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 parameter semantics are not applicable. Per the rubric, a tool with 0 parameters has a baseline score of 4 for this dimension. The empty schema and lack of parameters require no additional 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 specific verb and resource: "List non-sequential objects and common properties." This clearly identifies the tool as a summary/listing operation over non-sequential objects. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as zemax_nsc_get_object or zemax_nsc_get_object_parameter, so it stops short of a 5.

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 no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies an overview use case through "summary," but does not state when-not-to-use or name sibling alternatives like zemax_nsc_get_object. No prerequisites or context are provided.

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