vw_get_selection

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description usefully adds the scoping constraint that only the active layer is scanned, but it omits any mention of the default limit of 500, meaning a large selection could be silently truncated with no warning.

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 with the resource and field list front-loaded and no filler. It is a fragment rather than a sentence, but every clause 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?

An output schema exists, so the return structure need not be re-explained. However, with an undocumented limit parameter and no routing guidance against 16 siblings, the definition leaves real gaps for an agent deciding whether and how to call it.

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?

There is one parameter (limit) with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it at all. The agent gets no indication that results are capped or how to raise the cap, so the description fails to compensate for the schema 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?

The description names the specific resource ('selected objects on the active layer') and enumerates the fields returned, so an agent knows exactly what this tool surfaces. It lacks an explicit verb and does not distinguish itself from sibling query tools like vw_find_objects, which is the only thing keeping it from a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus vw_find_objects, vw_get_record, or vw_list_layers. The agent must infer that this reads the current selection while find_objects queries by criteria. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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