get_current_program_scene

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the meaning of 'Program' and implies a read-only operation via the 'get' verb, but it does not specify the return format, potential errors, or any other behavioral details. For a simple getter, this is adequate but not rich.

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 a single, concise phrase with no redundant words. Every word adds meaning, particularly the parenthetical clarification that makes the purpose explicit.

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 (no parameters, no output schema), the description provides enough context to select and invoke it correctly. It could optionally state the return value more explicitly, but the meaning is already clear from the name and description.

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 no properties, so there is nothing for the description to explain. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description correctly avoids adding unnecessary parameter details.

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 resource (current Program scene) and the action (get it via the 'get' verb implied in the name). The parenthetical '(what viewers see)' distinguishes it from the Preview scene, making it unambiguous and distinct from siblings like get_current_preview_scene.

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 'what viewers see' provides clear context for when to use this tool—specifically when the live Program scene is needed rather than Preview. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficient for an agent to infer the correct use case.

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