cascadeur_activate_scene

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, and the description adds little behavioral detail beyond the input-freshness warning. It does not explain what activation actually changes, whether it is reversible, or what impact it has on the current scene/session.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The action is front-loaded and the prerequisite instruction 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?

For a one-parameter tool, the core usage is stated, and the list_scenes dependency is mentioned. However, because this is a destructive state-changing operation with no output schema, the description omits what activation does to the current scene or session, leaving some context incomplete.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description compensates by defining index as a scene index returned by list_scenes and by emphasizing that indices must be refreshed before use. This adds meaningful meaning beyond the raw integer schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Activate') and identifies the resource as 'a scene index returned by list_scenes', which makes the target of the operation clear. It does not explicitly differentiate this from sibling tools like open_scene or new_scene, though the reference to list_scenes provides useful context.

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 gives a clear prerequisite: refresh indices before use, implying the agent should call list_scenes first. It does not explicitly explain when to choose activate_scene over alternatives such as open_scene, but the usage context is reasonably clear.

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