get_usd_variants

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior itself, but it only states 'Get...' and does not explicitly confirm it is read-only, say whether cooking/evaluation occurs, or describe the shape of the returned variant data. It also does not address prims that have no variants.

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 purpose is front-loaded in a single sentence and the argument notes are compactly listed. There is no filler, repetition, or extraneous detail for a two-parameter getter.

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 it is nearly sufficient, but without an output schema or annotations it omits the expected return format and edge-case behavior (e.g., a prim without variants). An agent could invoke it correctly but may not know how to interpret the result.

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?

Although the input schema has 0% description coverage, the description's Args block provides semantic labels: node_path is a LOP node path and prim_path is a USD prim path. This is enough to infer the parameter roles, even if exact path syntax is not illustrated.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get variant sets and selections for a USD prim.' This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like get_usd_prim and list_usd_prims by targeting variant sets and selections specifically.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of related USD tools such as get_usd_prim or get_usd_composition. The only usage information available is the list of required arguments.

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