get_scene_item_id

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses some behavior, such as 'Matches to skip. -1 = last (topmost) match,' and the read-only nature implied by 'Find.' However, it does not cover error cases (e.g., no match found) or the exact return format, leaving gaps for a tool with no output schema.

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 compact and well-structured, with a clear 'Args' section that adds value without repeating schema trivia. Every sentence earns its place, and the tool's purpose is front-loaded.

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?

As a simple lookup tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate but not complete. It covers the main parameters and purpose, but omits explicit return type, error behavior, and handling of multiple matches beyond search_offset. It is positioned somewhere between minimal and thorough.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides short descriptions for all three parameters, adding meaning beyond raw names. However, the descriptions are minimal and somewhat ambiguous (e.g., 'Matches to skip' for search_offset), leaving room for clearer semantics.

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 states the tool's function: 'Find a scene item's numeric ID by the source name it references.' This specifies the verb (find), the resource (scene item's numeric ID), and the key distinguishing detail (by source name). It is distinct from sibling tools like get_scene_item_list or get_scene_item_source.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the parameter descriptions offer some context (e.g., search_offset for skipping matches), it does not mention alternatives, exclusions, or typical use cases. The agent must infer usage.

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