get_api_docs

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

The term 'query' implies read-only behavior with no side effects, but this is not explicit. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden and could be clearer about non-modification.

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 extremely concise, with exactly two sentences that convey the core purpose and parameter usage without any redundant information.

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 description is complete for the tool's simple function: it states what it does and how to provide the input. No output schema is given, but that is acceptable for a documentation query tool.

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 only defines 'path' as a required string with no description, but the description adds meaning by giving examples of acceptable paths. This helps the agent understand the parameter's purpose and format.

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 tool queries bpy API documentation locally, using a specific verb ('query') and resource ('bpy API documentation'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools which are all scene/object manipulation commands.

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?

Provides concrete examples of valid path formats (e.g., bpy.types.Object) which guide usage. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, though siblings are unrelated to documentation.

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