keyshot_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds that this probes both the bridge layer and the application layer, which is useful beyond the annotations, but an output schema exists and the enumerated facets largely restate what that schema returns.

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?

A single compact sentence plus the ordering directive, with the resource named first and the call-order instruction last where it is most salient. No 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?

With an output schema present and no parameters, the description need not explain return values, and it correctly positions itself as the entry-point probe. Only minor gap: it doesn't characterize cost or what an agent should do if the bridge reports as down.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing parameter-level to disambiguate; the baseline for a no-param tool applies. The description correctly implies a parameterless probe but adds no further semantic detail, which is acceptable here.

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?

Names a specific resource (bridge + KeyShot state) and enumerates the concrete facets reported: versions, whether a scene is open, realtime pause state, active renders, available commands. That sets it apart from narrower siblings like render_status or get_scene_info, though it never explicitly says how it relates to them.

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?

'À appeler en premier' gives an explicit, actionable ordering directive that an agent can follow immediately. It stops short of stating when not to call it (e.g. once state is already known) or which sibling supersedes it for a narrower question.

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