editor_get_selection

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action and does not reveal any behavior beyond that—no return format, no indication of whether the result is a list of node paths, no mention of empty selection, or any side effects. The description is too sparse to be informative.

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 sentence of six words, with no wasted words. It is concise and front-loaded, conveying the core purpose immediately.

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?

The tool is very simple, but without an output schema, the description should clarify what is returned (e.g., node paths, node objects). The current text states the result (selected nodes) but not the format or structure, leaving a gap for an agent invoking the tool.

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, so the description does not need to explain parameter details. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description does not conflict with the empty schema.

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 'Get selected nodes in editor' uses a specific verb (Get) and resource (selected nodes), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like editor_set_selection. It communicates exactly what the tool does with no ambiguity.

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 implies the tool is for retrieving the current selection, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like editor_set_selection or editor_delete_selected. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., an active scene) or exclusions.

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