get_scene_state

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It correctly states 'Side effects: none' (a read operation) and the error behavior ('invalid scene index returns INVALID_PARAMS'). This covers the key behavioral facts an agent needs. Missing detail on rate limits or return format, but strong for a read-only tool.

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?

Four short, front-loaded lines with no waste. The example and edge case are useful, not filler. Slightly fragmented structure (labeled lines) but each earns its place.

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 single-param read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, side effects, an example, and error behavior. The main miss is not clarifying indexing semantics or the parameter explicitly, and not distinguishing from get_scenes.

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 coverage is 0% and the single parameter (scene_index) is undocumented in the schema. The description helps indirectly: the example 'get_scene_state(0) inspects the first scene' implies 0-based indexing, and the edge case mentions invalid indices. However, it never states the parameter name, type, or that it's required. Partial compensation but a clear gap.

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?

Clear specific verb+resource: 'Read one scene and its per-track clip-slot summary.' An agent understands exactly what it gets. Doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_scenes (plural) or get_clip_summary, but the singular-scene scope is reasonably inferable.

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 when-to-use guidance or alternatives named. The example shows a call but not when to prefer this over get_scenes. An agent must infer the distinction. This is a significant gap given the large sibling set containing get_scenes.

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