select_all

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, but the description adds no behavioral details beyond the action itself. It does not disclose that the current selection is replaced, whether hidden or frozen objects are included, or what side effects accompany the destructiveHint flag.

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 and front-loaded, but the Chinese and English sentences are exact duplicates. The repeated translation adds no new information for an agent, making it slightly redundant though still compact.

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 tool this is nearly sufficient, but the description leaves the behavioral scope ambiguous: does it include hidden/frozen objects? It also fails to contextualize the destructiveHint=true annotation, so an agent cannot fully anticipate the tool's side effects.

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?

There are zero parameters and the input schema is empty, so no parameter explanation is needed. The baseline 4 applies here because there is nothing for the description to document.

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 the imperative verb 'Select' with a specific resource, 'every object in the scene,' which clearly communicates what the tool does. This also distinguishes it from sibling selection tools like select_objects or select_by_superclass.

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 is only a statement of the operation and provides no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives. It does not mention replacing the current selection, or when select_objects or deselect_all would be more appropriate.

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