Stage Capture Status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it enumerates the possible states (waiting for GPU, loading room, rendering, done, failed), reports progress fields, and states that list mode orders newest first. It does not mention permissions or limits, but for a status read this is substantial disclosure.

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 status fields are front-loaded in the first sentence, with the listing behavior in the second. It is dense but every clause adds information; the only weakness is that the first sentence is somewhat run-on.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description needn't explain return values, but it does describe them usefully. The main gap is parameter coverage: scene and scenes are not explained despite 0% schema coverage, so an agent cannot fully map inputs to behavior.

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%, so the description must explain all three parameters. It only clarifies job (present vs absent) and vaguely references 'the scene'; the scenes parameter is never addressed, leaving key parameter semantics undocumented.

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?

It states a specific resource (a capture from stage_capture) and what is returned: state, frame progress, fps, time left, video, errors. The second sentence clarifies the alternate mode (listing a scene's captures), so it is distinguishable from the initiating stage_capture tool.

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 'Without job' sentence implies the two modes: pass job for one capture's status, omit it to list the scene's captures. However, it never explicitly says when to use this versus stage_capture or stage_scene_list, nor does it state prerequisites or exclusions.

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