voxelforge_select_scene

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention side effects (e.g., changes active scene), error handling (e.g., missing scene), or return values. This is insufficient for safe tool invocation.

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 extremely concise (one sentence) but fails to include essential information. Conciseness is not valuable when it sacrifices clarity and completeness. Structure lacks any breakdown of purpose, usage, or parameters.

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?

Given the existence of an output schema and sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the output, what 'selecting' does to the state, or how it relates to other scene operations. An agent lacks enough information to use this tool effectively.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the tool description adds no meaning to the 'name' parameter. It does not explain what the name represents (e.g., an existing scene's name) or any format constraints. The parameter is entirely undocumented.

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 the verb 'select' and resource 'scene', indicating the tool selects a scene for editing. However, it lacks specificity on what 'selecting' entails (e.g., setting as active), and the Thai language may hinder non-Thai agents. It does not distinguish from siblings like 'list_scenes'.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as requiring an existing scene name, or when not to use it. The single sentence offers no usage context.

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