Stage Sets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden; it does disclose the shape of the result (items as node names or globs, matched nodes from manifest.json, people from world.json actors, note, unloaded flag). It does not state that the call is read-only or has no side effects on the scene, and it says nothing about volume or pagination for scenes with many sets.

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 dense sentence, front-loaded with the resource and followed by the item/match semantics and the alternative tools. 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?

The output schema exists, so return-shape details are partly redundant, and the description does convey what a set contains. The gap is on the input side: an agent cannot confidently supply 'scene' or know what 'scenes' does, which matters for a tool with 0% schema coverage.

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 both parameters and does not: 'scene' is used implicitly but never defined (name? id? path?), and the optional 'scenes' parameter is not mentioned at all despite being a plural of the required field, which is genuinely ambiguous.

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 names the resource precisely ('the scene's load sets (world.json sets)') and enumerates what each set contains, which is enough to know this is an inspection/listing tool. Naming stage_set_define and stage_set_load explicitly separates it from the creation and application siblings, though the verb itself ('returns') is only implied.

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?

Pointing at stage_set_define and stage_set_load implies 'use this one to inspect, those to create or apply', which is useful routing. However, it never states the condition for calling this tool (e.g. 'call before deciding which set to load'), so usage is inferred rather than stated.

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