Get Hierarchy

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses important behaviors: max 3000 nodes, token-saving options (components, compress, summary token estimate), incremental returning NO_CHANGE, and full bypassing distillation. No contradictions with annotations.

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 about six sentences, front-loaded with a clear purpose, then an alternative, followed by parameter guidance. Each sentence is informative, though the run of 'Set X=true' imperatives is slightly dense but justified by token-saving tips.

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?

With no output schema, the description explains output types (text tree, summary counts, NO_CHANGE) and limits (3000 nodes). It covers all key params and their usage contexts, making it complete for a tool with 9 parameters and no explicit return structure.

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?

Schema covers all 9 parameters (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the purpose of filter/depth for narrowing, giving token estimate for summary, and clarifying compress grouping. However, it doesn't mention the root parameter or add detail for full, but schema already covers those.

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 opens with 'Scene hierarchy as text tree', clearly stating the tool's output format and purpose. It explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool search_scene by directing users to use search_scene for finding specific objects by name/type.

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 an explicit alternative: 'For finding specific object by name/type use search_scene.' It also gives practical usage advice such as 'Use filter/depth to narrow' and explains when to enable flags like components, compress, summary, and incremental.

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