get_scene

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get details', implying read-only behavior, but never explicitly states that the operation has no side effects, what happens for missing IDs, or any permissions/rate-limit constraints.

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 concise and front-loaded with the purpose. The Args section is structured and every line adds information; there is no filler or repetition.

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?

The output schema covers the return type, so not describing return values is acceptable, and the two required parameters are both documented. However, the description omits usage context and behavioral caveats, and it does not mention how group_id should be discovered (only scene_id), leaving minor gaps for an agent to fill.

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 bare string parameters with 0% description coverage, so the Args block adds real value: 'Numeric group ID' clarifies the expected format, and 'use list_scenes to discover IDs' gives the agent a concrete discovery path for scene_id. This compensates for the sparse 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 opens with a clear verb and resource: 'Get details of a specific scene.' It distinguishes this read operation from scene mutation/listing siblings like create_scene, recall_scene, and list_scenes, though it does not name any alternative explicitly.

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 choose this tool over alternatives. The only workflow hint is 'use list_scenes to discover IDs', which addresses acquiring the scene_id but does not explain when get_scene is appropriate or when another sibling should be used.

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