scene_get_hierarchy

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the return is a paginated flat list with specific fields (name, type, path, child count), that it walks to a specified depth, and that it operates on the active scene. This gives good behavioral insight, though it doesn't explicitly state read-only or error behavior.

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 two sentences plus a resource form line, with the core purpose stated first. Every sentence adds value and there is no redundancy or filler.

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?

Given the output schema and fully documented parameters, the description covers the key behavioral aspects (pagination, depth, flat list, active scene). It doesn't mention error handling or explicit read-only safety, but those are less critical for a get-style tool with an output schema.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context by explaining the result is a paginated flat list and that depth controls walk depth, but this largely restates what the schema already provides. It does not significantly extend parameter understanding beyond the schema.

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 'Get the scene tree hierarchy from the open scene' with a specific verb and resource, and clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like node_find by focusing on the full hierarchy rather than searching. The resource form adds further specificity.

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 says 'prefer for active-session reads', providing clear context on when to use the resource form. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so exclusions are missing.

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