get_blender_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, whether it makes network calls (e.g., to check Sketchfab token status), or what 'server status' means. The lack of clarity on side effects and network behavior is a significant gap.

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 concise line listing the data items. It is efficient and front-loaded with the tool's name implied. However, it lacks a leading verb phrase like 'Gets' to clarify the action, though the list is still understandable.

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 is a simple getter with no parameters and no output schema. The description lists the data items but does not specify the return format (e.g., a JSON object with keys) or clarify ambiguous terms like 'server 状态'. It is adequate for a basic query but leaves some ambiguity about how results are delivered.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema confirms this (100% coverage). With no parameters to describe, the description adds no parameter semantics, but the baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4, which is appropriate here since nothing is missing.

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 enumerates the specific data items the tool retrieves (Blender version, Python, current file, enabled plugins, server status, Sketchfab token configuration), making its purpose unambiguous. This distinguishes it from sibling getters like get_scene_info and get_object_info, which target scene or object data rather than global Blender environment state.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is for checking Blender environment status, nor does it contrast with similar query tools. Given the extensive sibling list, an agent would not know when to prefer this over other getters.

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