rhino_show_selected

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only restates the surface action. It does not clarify whether the command acts on selected hidden objects or all hidden objects, nor what happens to locked objects, and the name/description mismatch leaves the actual behavior unclear.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler, so it is appropriately concise for a no-argument command. It loses a point only because the brevity omits the selection vs. all distinction that the tool name signals.

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?

Although the tool is simple and has no parameters, the description is not complete enough on its own: it contradicts the tool name's 'selected' scope and provides no context about how visibility toggling interacts with current selection. A one-sentence description would be sufficient only if it resolved that ambiguity.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description has no parameter-semantics burden. Per the 0-parameter baseline, this dimension is adequately satisfied.

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 states a concrete verb and resource ('Show all hidden objects'), which is more specific than a tautology. However, the tool name 'rhino_show_selected' implies it operates on selected hidden objects, while the description says 'all hidden objects', so the intended scope is ambiguous and an agent cannot confidently distinguish the actual behavior.

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 guidance is given about when to use this tool instead of rhino_hide_selected, rhino_delete_selected, rhino_lock_selected, or other visibility commands. There is no mention of prerequisites such as having hidden objects selected or a distinction from a show-all command.

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