clear_scene

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully explain behavioral traits, but it only states that all mobjects and animations are removed and that it returns True. It does not disclose potential side effects, such as whether the action is irreversible (no undo), whether it also clears camera/config/states, or whether it requires an existing scene. This is a destructive operation, so more transparency is needed.

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 concise and well-structured: it opens with the core purpose, includes a return value, and offers an example. The 'IMPORTANT' sentence is a generic instruction that may not add tool-specific value, but the overall length is appropriate and every other sentence earns its place.

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 simplicity (no parameters), an output schema, and the clear statement of behavior and return value, the description is complete enough for an agent to use it correctly. It could add advice on when to use it relative to restore_state, but that is a usage guideline rather than essential contextual completeness. The example reinforces the call pattern.

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 is an empty object. According to the rubric, a baseline of 4 is appropriate when there are no parameters, as there is nothing to explain. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed.

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's function with a specific verb and resource: 'Remove all mobjects and animations from the current scene.' This unambiguously distinguishes it from siblings like create_scene, get_scene_info, and restore_state, all of which perform different operations.

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 implies usage when a scene needs to be emptied, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer clear_scene over restore_state or provide any exclusions. The 'IMPORTANT: Always use MCP tools' note is a general directive, not specific to this tool, and gives no guidance about alternatives.

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