get_system_info

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 useful context about what data is included, but discloses no additional behavioral traits such as cost, output size, or distinctions between session and scene state. This is adequate but not enriched beyond the annotations.

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 short, front-loaded, and uses a clear list of data categories. However, the Chinese and English sentences duplicate the exact same content, which is somewhat redundant even if intentional for a bilingual tool.

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 tool, the description gives enough detail about the returned snapshot to let an agent decide when to call it. Since there is no output schema, the enumerated fields partially compensate, but the exact response structure is not described. This is slightly incomplete but not materially misleading.

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 the input schema is empty with 100% schema coverage, so there is no parameter documentation burden for the description. The baseline of 4 applies because nothing is missing.

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 ('Return') with a clear resource ('full snapshot of the session') and enumerates the included fields: renderer, units, frame rate, animation range, scene path, and object statistics. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling getters like get_units, get_time_config, render_get_engine, and scene_statistics, which each return only one slice of session state.

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 phrase 'full snapshot' implies this tool is for retrieving combined environment information rather than individual values, but it never explicitly says when to choose this over the many granular sibling getters. There are no when-not-to-use instructions or named alternatives, so the guidance is present only by implication.

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