close_3d_scene

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

Annotations already indicate it is not read-only and not destructive, but the description adds valuable context: it releases a local server and temporary data, disconnects active viewers, and explicitly states it does not delete source files. This goes beyond the annotations and clarifies side effects without contradicting them.

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 three short sentences, each carrying meaningful information. The main action is front-loaded, and the clarification about not deleting source files is a useful safeguard. There is no redundant or unnecessary text.

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 tool with a single obvious parameter and an output schema, the description covers the key behavioral aspects (releases server/temp data, disconnects viewers, preserves source files). It does not address edge cases like idempotency or invalid scene IDs, but given the simplicity, it is adequately complete.

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 provides only the parameter name 'scene_id' with a title, and schema_description_coverage is 0%. The description does not mention or explain the scene_id parameter at all, leaving the agent to infer its meaning from context. With low coverage, the description was expected to compensate but does not.

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 'Release' and names the resource 'viewer's local server and temporary data', clearly distinguishing this from other sibling tools like open_3d_files or update_3d_scene. It also explicitly clarifies it does not delete user source files, further differentiating it from destructive operations.

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 this is used to close or disconnect a viewer session, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or mention any exclusions. Given it is the only 'close' tool among siblings, the usage is largely inferred but not directly guided.

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