get_usd_composition

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral burden. The verb 'Get' implies a safe read-only retrieval, but the description does not explicitly confirm non-destructiveness, permissions, or side effects.

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 and front-loaded, with the core action first and argument notes immediately after. Every line contributes useful information without waste.

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 two-parameter getter with no annotations or output schema, the description covers the action and both parameters adequately. It omits when to use the tool and what the returned composition arcs represent, leaving some contextual gap.

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. It identifies node_path as a 'LOP node path' and prim_path as a 'USD prim path,' adding basic semantic context for both required parameters, though no path format examples are given.

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 and resource: 'Get composition arcs for a USD prim.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from generic prim/attribute getters, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like get_usd_layers or inspect_usd_layer.

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?

Provides no when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives. It only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer when composition arcs are needed versus other USD inspection tools.

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