Scene Connections

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Follow' implies a read-only traversal, but the description does not explain traversal limits, truncation behavior, depth handling, or side effects, which are important for an agent invoking a graph-connection tool.

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. It is concise, though its brevity contributes to the missing parameter and usage details assessed elsewhere.

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?

The tool has six parameters, no annotations, and only one short description sentence. Although an output schema exists and need not be repeated, the description is not complete enough to tell an agent how to scope the traversal or what the parameters mean.

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 schema has six parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description does not name or explain any of them. At best, 'input/output' hints at the direction enum and 'nodes or plugs' hints at targets, but depth, include_types, exclude_types, and max_connections are entirely undocumented.

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, 'Follow,' and a specific resource, 'input/output plug connections from nodes or plugs.' It is clear enough to distinguish this as a connection-traversal tool rather than a scene context or hierarchy tool, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling tools.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The description only says what the tool does, leaving an agent to infer usage from the name and schema.

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