Inspect a KeyShot scene

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the 'read-only' behavior and specifies the exact data returned (metadata, objects, cameras, etc.), which provides additional context beyond the annotations without contradiction.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core action ('Open a scene read-only') and efficiently lists the return items. No redundant words or details.

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 simple read-only inspection tool with a single parameter, an existing output schema, and strong annotations, the description covers the necessary aspects: what it does, what it returns, and its safety profile. It does not address edge cases like missing files, but these are not essential given the output schema and read-only nature.

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 input schema already provides full documentation for the single parameter 'scenePath', including its type and purpose. The description does not add further parameter-level details, so it does not improve on the schema's coverage.

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 uses specific verbs ('Open', 'return') and clearly identifies the resource ('scene') and the scope of what is returned (metadata, objects, cameras, material assignments, model sets, external references). It effectively distinguishes this inspection tool from rendering or camera-specific siblings.

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 usage when a read-only inspection of the scene is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like keyshot_list_cameras or keyshot_status. There is no mention of exclusions or preferred scenarios, leaving usage inferred from the verb 'inspect' and 'read-only'.

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