list_file_parms

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It never states that the operation is read-only, whether it requires a cooked/valid node, or what it returns, and 'No new importer' is ambiguous about what side effects (if any) occur.

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?

It is short and front-loaded, which is appropriate for a simple list tool. But the trailing 'No new importer' is cryptic filler that neither guides usage nor explains behavior, so not every phrase 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 return values need not be explained, and the tool has only one parameter. Still, with zero annotations and zero schema descriptions, the definition leaves the agent without confirmation of read-only behavior or node prerequisites for a Houdini-style parameter query.

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 node_path is undocumented in the schema. The description's 'on a node' loosely implies node_path identifies the target node, but adds no syntax, format, or path-type detail to compensate for the coverage 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 verb 'list' and resource 'file/path parms on a node' are identifiable, and the parenthetical examples (alembic, usd, texture, fbx, vdb) clarify the kind of parameters. However, the phrasing is terse and abbreviations like 'parms' plus the cryptic trailing clause 'No new importer' muddy the purpose, and it does not clearly distinguish itself from siblings like get_parameter or set_file.

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 new importer' hints at a scope boundary but is too opaque to function as when-to-use guidance. There is no explicit statement of when to use this versus get_parameter, set_file, or get_parameter_schema, leaving the agent to infer selection.

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