Scene Change Plan

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the annotation readOnlyHint=false. It does not explain side effects, expected output, or the nature of the 'safe scene edit' guarantee. With only a one-sentence description, the burden of transparency is almost entirely unmet.

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 it is under-specified rather than concise. The '1.' appears to be a leftover from an incomplete numbered list, which is a structural flaw. It does not earn its place as a meaningful statement.

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 there is no output schema, minimal annotations, and a description that provides almost no context, the tool is severely under-described. A planning/pre-flight tool likely has complex behavior, but nothing explains what the plan entails, how it is returned, or what 'safe' means.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline score of 4 applies. The description does not need to explain parameter details. However, it could have elaborated on what aspects of a scene edit are checked or planned, but that falls under other dimensions.

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 states it is a 'Pre-flight + plan for safe scene edit', which gives a vague sense of purpose but lacks a specific verb or resource. The trailing '1.' suggests an incomplete list, adding confusion. It does not clearly distinguish from sibling tools like apply_scene_change or verify_after_change.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The phrase 'pre-flight + plan' implies it might be used before edits, but there is no explicit context, exclusions, or mention of sibling tools.

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