create_scene

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the basic mutation (create) and the index parameter's meaning. It omits details such as whether the operation is undoable, if it adds a default scene name, or what happens to existing scenes when inserting at an index. This is a minimal behavioral disclosure.

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 extremely concise: a one-line purpose statement followed by a parameter breakdown. It is front-loaded with the action verb and contains no filler or redundant information.

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 single-parameter create operation with no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks context. It does not mention return value, side effects on the session, or error conditions. Given the simplicity, it is minimally complete but would benefit from stating that a new scene is appended by default (since index defaults to -1) and possibly that it is an undoable operation.

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 schema only provides type and default for the index parameter, with no description. The description adds crucial meaning: 'The index to insert the scene at (-1 = end of list)'. This clarifies that the index is an insertion point and that -1 represents the end of the list, which is not self-evident from 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 clearly states the tool's action: 'Create a new scene.' The verb 'create' is specific and distinguishes it from scene-related siblings like delete_scene, duplicate_scene, fire_scene, and stop_scene. The resource is unambiguous.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that duplicate_scene might be appropriate for copying existing scenes, or that create_scene is for adding a new empty scene. The description only explains parameters, not usage context.

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