Stage Scene Reload

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so thoroughly: it discloses retained state, automatic reload conditions, error cases, reply fields, emitted events, and a delayed trees_loaded side effect. These details give the agent unusually complete operational context.

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 core action is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the remaining details are relevant to behavior and invocation. Some of the reply-field enumeration is redundant given the output schema, but the description remains dense and purposeful rather than bloated.

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 no annotations, the description adequately covers behavioral side effects, automatic triggers, errors, events, and the delayed tree reload. The main gap is that the single required scene parameter remains semantically undefined, but the output schema and event details are otherwise sufficient.

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 has one required parameter, scene, with 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It only refers to 'this scene' and does not explain the expected identifier format, source, or valid values for the scene parameter.

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 first sentence gives a specific verb and resource: swap in a fresh export of this scene now. It also clarifies the retained state (view and unsaved edits). It does not explicitly differentiate from nearby siblings such as stage_scene_export, stage_scene_new, or stage_trees_reload.

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 use when a manual scene reload from a fresh export is needed and notes automatic reload behavior when scene.glb and manifest.json change. However, it does not explicitly state when to call this tool versus alternatives, nor does it give clear exclusions for manual invocation.

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