get_scene_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says nothing about what scope the summary covers, whether it is read-only (implied by get), what triggers the computation, or what level of detail is returned.

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?

A single short sentence with no waste and the intent front-loaded. Appropriate size, though brevity here is partly a symptom of missing content rather than disciplined pruning.

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 scene-summary tool with no output schema, the description should at least hint at what the summary includes, since it cannot describe a return shape. As written it gives the agent nothing to distinguish it from the many other scene-inspection tools.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to compensate for; no parameter semantics exist to be unclear.

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?

States a specific verb (get) and resource (scene summary), which is clear enough on its own. But among many siblings that also retrieve scene-wide state (get_scene_info, get_context_info, get_network_overview), there is no differentiation of what a summary contains or how it differs from those.

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 when-to-use guidance, no alternatives named, no exclusion criteria. The agent cannot tell from the description whether to prefer this over get_scene_info or get_context_info, which appear to serve adjacent purposes.

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