get_current_preview_scene

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It adds the studio-mode constraint but fails to disclose what happens outside studio mode (e.g., error, null return) or what the return value represents (scene name, ID, object). This leaves significant behavioral ambiguity for a getter.

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 short sentence that states the tool's essence and a critical caveat. It is front-loaded and contains no redundant information.

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 no-parameter getter, the description covers the key context (preview scene, studio mode). However, it omits any mention of the return value format, which could be important since no output schema is provided. Still, the simplicity of the tool makes this a minor gap.

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 schema shows an empty object. The description adds nothing about parameters, but with no params, the baseline is 4 and no additional info is needed.

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 identifies the specific resource (the current preview scene) and distinguishes it from the program scene by name and context. However, it lacks an explicit verb like 'returns' or 'gets', relying on the tool name to convey the action.

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 note 'Only meaningful in studio mode' provides clear context for when the tool is appropriate, implicitly distinguishing it from program-scene queries in non-studio modes. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives like get_current_program_scene, but the context is clear.

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