Open Cocos Scene

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose what happens if the scene does not exist, if the editor is not running, or whether the tool modifies state. Only states the action, lacking behavioral detail.

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 very short (one sentence), which is concise but lacks structure. It could be improved by front-loading key constraints or parameters.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain how to identify the scene (path vs uuid), default behavior, or error conditions.

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 description coverage is 0%, meaning the input schema provides no descriptions. The tool description adds no information about any of the 5 parameters (projectRoot, scenePath, sceneUuid, port, timeoutMs), leaving the agent to infer their meaning from names alone.

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 action ('open'), the resource ('Cocos Creator scene asset'), and the context ('in the running editor through the Codex editor bridge'). It differentiates from sibling tools like cocos_local_create_scene_from_template or cocos_local_apply_scene_blueprint, which involve creation or modification.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many siblings (e.g., cocos_local_open_project, cocos_local_create_scene_from_template), the agent would benefit from conditions like 'Use when you need to open an existing scene for editing.'

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