get_scene_snapshot

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden, and it delivers: it states the return format, the implementation source (C++ SceneSnapshotProvider), the performance characteristic (cheaper), and secure-mode compatibility. The verb 'Return' also makes the non-mutating nature clear.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by differentiating detail. Each sentence contributes useful information: contents, implementation, cost, and secure-mode caveat, with 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 presence of an output schema covers return-value details, and the tool has no parameters. The description covers the essential operating context: what it returns, what it contains, how it is produced, its cost relative to alternatives, and when it remains available. Nothing critical is missing for a zero-parameter read-only snapshot call.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty, so there is no parameter semantic gap for the description to fill. Per the rubric, 0 parameters gets a baseline of 4; the description adds no parameter-specific detail because none is needed.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Return the full scene state as JSON', and enumerates the contained data (entities, components, transforms, hierarchy). It further differentiates itself from siblings by highlighting that it is a single native call and cheaper than list_entities plus per-entity queries.

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?

It explicitly positions the tool against alternatives: 'Cheaper than list_entities plus per-entity queries' and 'rather than an editor Python script'. It also gives a specific compatibility condition: 'still works when the AgentServer runs in secure mode', which tells an agent when this tool is preferable.

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