babylonjs_scene_inspect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'Inspect' implies a read-only operation, and the category list clarifies what will be examined, but it does not explicitly promise no side effects, warn about the cost of 'full', or describe the output shape. This is adequate but not rich.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: an action statement, a category menu, and parameter usage. It is compact, front-loaded, and avoids repeating schema metadata unnecessarily.

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 read-only inspection tool with no required parameters, the description covers the main invocation choices and provides enough context to select summary, full, or a drill-down category. It leaves minor gaps: no output format, no explicit combination rules for target/filter with categories, and no caveat about potentially expensive operations like the full scene graph.

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 100%, so the schema already documents category, target, and filter. The description restates the intended use of target and filter and adds conceptual framing, but it does not provide material new semantic information beyond the schema.

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 opening sentence 'Inspect the BabylonJS scene' names a specific action and resource, and the category list makes the object of inspection concrete. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like babylonjs_scene_evaluate or babylonjs_screenshot, but the verb and categories make the tool's role clear.

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?

It provides explicit guidance for choosing a category: 'summary' for overview, 'full' for complete scene graph, and named categories for drilling into specific aspects. It also instructs when to use target and filter. It does not state when this tool should be preferred over sibling tools or when not to use it.

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