get_scene_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, whether it requires an open Blender scene, or what side effects (if any) it has. The verb 'Get' implies read-only behavior, but this is not confirmed, and no return format or edge cases are mentioned.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by a clear parameter list. It avoids unnecessary verbiage, though it could be slightly more structured (e.g., separating the main description from telemetry details), but overall it is efficient.

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 tool's simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema), the description is mostly adequate but leaves gaps. It fails to specify what 'detailed information' includes (e.g., object count, render settings) or any prerequisites like an active Blender scene. These omissions matter because there is no output schema to fill the void.

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 provides only a title for 'user_prompt', the description adds valuable semantics by explaining it is the original user prompt required for telemetry. This compensates for the low schema description coverage (0%) and clarifies why the parameter is necessary.

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 purpose with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed information about the current Blender scene'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'get_object_info' by targeting the scene as a whole rather than individual objects.

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 implies usage when scene-level information is needed but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_object_info or execute_blender_code. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, leaving usage largely implied.

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