tracking.setup_scene

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

Annotations indicate a non-read-only, non-idempotent, potentially destructive operation, but the description does not say what changes occur, whether existing tracking data is modified, or what side effects to expect. 'Risk: standard; maturity: L3' adds metadata, not behavioral clarity.

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 short and compact, with no rambling, and the command name is front-loaded. However, the content that follows is mostly boilerplate metadata rather than functional explanation, so the structure is tidy but the space is not used effectively.

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 tool with 5 parameters, no functional description, and an undocumented 'clip' parameter, the description is not sufficient for correct invocation. Even with an output schema present, an agent cannot determine the tool's purpose, prerequisites, or relation to tracking siblings.

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 description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema. The key required parameter 'clip' is undocumented in both the schema and description, and with 60% schema coverage, the remaining gap is not compensated for by the text.

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 only identifies the command as 'PartMe Blender Harness command `tracking.setup_scene`' and adds risk/maturity labels; it never states what setting up a scene actually does. This largely restates the title rather than defining a specific operation or resource.

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 given about when to use this tool, what precedes it, or how it relates to siblings like tracking_load_clip, tracking_add_track, or tracking_solve_camera. The note about 'session policy' is a requirement, not a usage context.

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