blender_get_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it retrieves version and status, which aligns with these hints but doesn't disclose additional behavioral traits like what exactly 'status' covers or any prerequisites.

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 very short (two lines) but includes a 'Returns' line that repeats information likely already in an output schema. It is concise but lacks structure and valuable detail for the user.

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 the presence of an output schema (as per context signals), the description doesn't need to elaborate on return values. However, it is incomplete regarding the input parameter and the exact nature of 'status information'. It's minimally adequate.

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 input schema has one required parameter 'params' which is an empty object. The description does not explain this parameter or its purpose. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate by clarifying that no actual parameters are needed.

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 clearly states the tool gets 'Blender version and status information', which is a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes from siblings like 'blender_connection_status' which focuses on connection state, not version/status of Blender itself.

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. For example, it doesn't differentiate from 'blender_connection_status' or explain when to use one over the other.

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