get_selection

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states what the tool does, not what the return value looks like, whether it returns an empty list when nothing is selected, or whether it reflects the current network editor context. For a read-only query tool, the lack of return format details is a gap.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource. There is no wasted text.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description is thin. An agent doesn't know what the selection data structure looks like (node paths? names?), whether it's a list, or how it behaves with multiple panes/contexts. For a simple getter this is a notable gap, though the zero-parameter simplicity mitigates it somewhat.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics burden. The description correctly implies no arguments are needed. Baseline 4 is appropriate for a no-parameter tool.

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 'Get the current node selection' clearly states the verb (get) and resource (current node selection). It is distinct from the sibling set_selection, which is the complementary operation. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other get_* tools, though the resource is specific enough.

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 implies usage: call it when you need to know what nodes are currently selected. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like get_scene_info or get_network_overview. The context is clear but no exclusions or alternatives are given.

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