cascadeur_get_pose

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful output detail about WXYZ quaternions and Euler radians, but it does not describe return structure, error handling, or behavior for missing objects.

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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the additional sentence about rotation formats adds a distinct, useful detail without redundancy.

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 simple read-only tool with strong annotations, the description is mostly adequate. However, since there is no output schema, the description should more clearly explain the return shape, such as whether translation and scale are included alongside rotation and how local versus global values are structured.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only weakly maps 'at a frame' to the frame parameter and 'transforms' to objects. It does not explain that objects is required, that objects has a 200-item limit, or that frame defaults to 0 and is constrained to 0-100000.

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 ('Read') and a specific resource ('local/global transforms at a frame'), making the tool's purpose clear. It implicitly contrasts with sibling set_pose, but it does not explicitly name or differentiate itself from related tools like get_object or sample_motion.

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 no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. It implies the tool is for reading transforms at a frame, but it does not tell the agent when to prefer this over cascadeur_get_object, cascadeur_sample_motion, or cascadeur_set_pose, nor does it mention any prerequisites.

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