get_stage_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose side effects (likely read-only but not stated), return format, error conditions, or whether the LOP node must be cooked. The phrase 'get info' implies a query but gives no detail on what the agent should expect.

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 compact and includes a single parameter line. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. However, it uses a docstring-style 'Args:' block that is unnecessary for a single parameter and adds a tiny bit of 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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must stand alone. It fails to explain what 'stage info' returns, how it relates to other USD inspection tools, or any operational caveats. For a tool with one parameter and no other metadata, this is inadequate for an agent to confidently select and invoke it.

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 description documents the parameter 'node_path' as 'LOP node path', which adds meaning beyond the schema's bare title 'Node Path'. However, it does not clarify if the path is absolute, relative, or how to format it. Given the schema has zero description coverage, this minimal addition earns a baseline 3.

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 states a clear verb+resource: 'Get USD stage info from a LOP node.' It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_usd_prim (which gets a specific prim) and get_usd_layers (which gets layers). However, it does not specify what 'stage info' includes (e.g., root prims, layers, metadata), leaving some ambiguity.

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 on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools that also access USD data (e.g., get_scene_info, get_usd_prim_stats, list_usd_prims). It does not state any prerequisites, exclusions, or comparisons.

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