editor

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering safety aspects. The description adds the operational prerequisite of editor mode and plugin connection, and clarifies the effect of each action (start listening, stop, snapshot), providing value beyond the structured metadata.

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 one concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Editor real-time operations') and efficiently lists the three actions with parenthetical explanations. Every word earns its place; no redundancy or wasted space.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and lack of an output schema, the description adequately covers the operations and prerequisites. It hints at what get_scene_tree returns ('snapshot'), but could offer slightly more detail on expected return values or states. Still, it is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 schema has 100% coverage for both parameters, but the description enriches the action enum values with concrete meanings (e.g., sync_start = start scene tree listening). This goes beyond the bare schema descriptions, adding useful semantics for the enum.

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 clearly identifies the tool as handling editor real-time operations and explicitly enumerates each action (sync_start, sync_stop, get_scene_tree) with a brief explanation. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like scene or runtime by focusing on editor-mode synchronization.

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 states a clear prerequisite ('Requires editor mode with plugin connection') but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. Usage context is implied through the listed operations, but there is no direct comparison to siblings.

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