get_custom_properties

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses nothing: not whether the operation is read-only, what it returns, how it handles errors, or any side effects. The description simply names the operation without any behavioral detail.

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 short, but this is under-specification rather than concise writing. It consists solely of a prefix and the tool name, which adds no informational value. While it is brief, it fails to earn its place by providing any actionable detail.

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?

Given the tool's likely purpose of retrieving custom properties for an object, the description is wholly incomplete. It lacks any explanation of the return value, output schema, expected input format, or relationship to sibling property operations. For a single-parameter tool with no annotation support, this is critically inadequate.

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 input schema has one parameter, object_name, but with zero schema description coverage. The tool description adds no meaning to the parameter—it does not explain what object_name refers to, its expected format, or its role. The parameter is entirely undocumented semantically.

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 is a bare restatement of the tool name, 'Blender Studio Pro MCP: get_custom_properties'. It contains no verb, resource, or action, and offers no differentiation from sibling tools. It fails to indicate whether this retrieves or lists custom properties, making it impossible for an agent to infer the function.

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 regarding when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like set_custom_property and delete_custom_property exist, but the description does not mention them, nor does it explain any prerequisites or scenarios for use. The agent is left with no contextual direction.

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