spine_get_skeleton_hierarchy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the return of skeleton tree and optional transforms but omits details like whether it is read-only, any side effects, the format of the tree, or error conditions. For a tool with no annotations, this is insufficient.

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?

Extremely concise: two clauses in one sentence. The main action '返回骨骼树' is front-loaded, with the optional behavior appended. Every word is necessary; no fluff.

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 (2 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the basic functionality but lacks details about the return structure, error handling, or the meaning of 'skeleton tree' in terms of hierarchy. It is minimally adequate but not richly informative.

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 covers 50% (filePath has a description, includeSetupPose does not). The description adds meaning for includeSetupPose: '可选返回 setup pose 的局部变换' (optionally returns local transforms of setup pose), which clarifies the boolean's effect. This compensates for the missing schema description.

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 it returns the skeleton tree (骨骼树) and optionally the local transforms of the setup pose. The verb '返回' and resource '骨骼树' are specific. Among sibling tools like spine_get_slots or spine_get_skins, the purpose is distinct, though no explicit differentiation is provided.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like spine_get_document_summary or other getters. There is no mention of prerequisites or context (e.g., filePath must exist). The description only states what it does, not when to choose it.

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