find_usd_prims

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and supplies almost nothing. It does not state pattern syntax (glob vs regex), case sensitivity, whether results are paginated or capped, or whether non-matching patterns error or return empty. The only signal is that matching is against paths.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is good structurally. But the brevity reflects under-specification rather than efficiency, given three undocumented parameters and no annotations to fall back on.

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 three-parameter search tool with zero annotation and schema-description coverage and no output schema, an agent needs pattern syntax and instance-proxy semantics to call it correctly. Neither is present, so the definition is not complete enough to invoke reliably beyond a guess.

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%, so the description must compensate and does so only partially: "path pattern" loosely maps to the pattern parameter, but node_path is never explained and traverse_instance_proxies — a non-obvious USD concept affecting results — is entirely unmentioned. Two of three parameters remain semantically undefined.

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?

"Search USD prims by path pattern" names a specific verb and resource, so the basic action is legible. However, the sibling set contains list_usd_prims, get_usd_prims, and get_prims, and nothing here distinguishes a pattern-based search from listing or single-prim retrieval. The purpose is understandable but not disambiguated.

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 when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use, and no mention of the sibling tools such as list_usd_prims. The phrase "by path pattern" weakly implies usage for pattern matching, but selecting this over list_usd_prims is left entirely to inference.

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