Retrieves a list of objects in the current Blender scene, including their names, types, and visibility states. Use it to quickly inspect scene contents.
返回 Blender 当前场景的对象清单（名称 / 类型 / 可见性）。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavior burden. The verb '返回' (returns) strongly implies a read-only operation with no side effects, and the description provides no conflicting cues. Yet it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, error conditions, or performance implications, which prevents a higher score.
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 compact sentence that delivers the verb, resource, and result fields without any redundancy. Every piece of information is essential, and the parenthetical list provides precision without clutter.
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 zero-parameter read-only summary tool, the description covers the essential context: resource scope ('current scene') and the result fields. An output schema exists to further specify return values. Minor gaps include not stating whether empty scenes produce an empty list or whether ordering is guaranteed, but these are non-critical for typical use.
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 an empty input schema, so there is no parameter ambiguity. The description adds value by clarifying the output content, which is especially useful given the baseline of 4 for parameterless tools.
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 clearly states the operation (returns), the resource (object list of the current Blender scene), and the exact fields included (name/type/visibility). This distinguishes it from siblings like blender_object_info (single-object details) and blender_status (status overview), making the tool's purpose unambiguous.
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?
The description implies the tool is used when an agent needs an overview of objects in the current scene. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools or conditions for when not to use this tool, so guidance is only implicit rather than prescriptive.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.