fusion_get_comp_path_tool

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

The description discloses minimal behavior: it returns the path only if saved. It does not specify what happens when the composition is unsaved (e.g., null or error), nor does it mention prerequisites like an open composition. No annotations exist to compensate.

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?

A single sentence of 9 words with no extraneous information. Every word is necessary and front-loaded.

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 parameterless getter, the description is minimal but lacks details on error states (e.g., unsaved composition), return format (path string or null), and prerequisite conditions. It is adequate but not thorough.

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?

There are no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds meaning by referencing the 'active composition', implying reliance on the current state. This is sufficient given the lack of parameters.

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 clearly states the verb 'Return' and the resource 'active composition path', with a condition 'if saved'. It is specific and distinguishes the tool from siblings like fusion_get_comp_settings or fusion_get_status.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not explain when to choose this over fusion_get_comp_settings or fusion_get_status.

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