get_class_properties

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavioral value by stating that the tool returns current values, not just property names, and that it filters to readable/writable properties. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 two short bilingual sentences, with the core action stated first and the high-value usage tip immediately after. No filler or irrelevant detail is present.

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 two-parameter, read-only listing tool, the description covers what it does, what it returns (property names plus current values), and when to use it. Since there is no output schema, a slightly more explicit return-shape statement would make it fully complete, but nothing critical is missing.

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 100%, and both parameters are documented in the schema with examples ('Spherical_Light or VRayMtl') and defaults. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb+resource: 'list every readable/writable property of a class with its current value.' It clearly separates this from related tools like get_property_value (single property), get_class_methods (methods), and list_scene_classes (scene instances) by specifying class-level property enumeration.

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 gives explicit, actionable guidance: 'Check this before setting unfamiliar parameters - it removes most trial and error.' This clearly tells agents when to call it. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it falls just short of 5.

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