open_scene

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states 'Open a scene file' without disclosing side effects (e.g., changing the current editor scene), required editor state, error handling, or return behavior. This is a significant transparency gap.

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 concise sentence with no redundant text. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices valuable context, making it more under-specified than appropriately concise. Efficiency is good, but completeness suffers.

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 tool with one parameter, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain path format, whether the scene is loaded into the current project, or what the agent can expect in return. The agent lacks enough context to invoke the tool correctly and safely.

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%, and the description does not clarify the 'path' parameter's expected format (e.g., absolute vs relative, file extension). The parameter name provides minimal meaning, but the description adds no value beyond what the name implies.

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 the core action 'Open' and the resource 'scene file', clearly distinguishing it from create/save/close scene operations. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from 'launch_editor', which might be confused as opening a scene, so it lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_scene or launch_editor. No prerequisites, context, or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent without a clear decision framework.

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