wavedash_get_publishing_checklistReturn Wavedash upload and publishing checklist guidance, optionally including an engine-specific docs page. Read-only and unauthenticated.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| engine | No | Optional engine/framework, for example unity, godot, phaser, three.js, react, rust, or custom. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| text | Yes | Human-readable tool result text. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint), the description adds that the tool is unauthenticated and optionally includes engine-specific content. This provides useful behavioral context not present in annotations.
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, front-loaded sentence with zero waste. It conveys purpose, optionality, and safety in a compact form.
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 has one optional parameter and an output schema, the description is sufficient. It covers purpose, optional behavior, and safety, making it complete for this simple 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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description's mention of 'engine-specific docs page' aligns with the schema but does not add new meaning beyond what the parameter description already provides.
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 uses a specific verb-resource pair: 'Return... checklist guidance.' It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like wavedash_get_doc or wavedash_get_quickstart by focusing on publishing checklist guidance.
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 usage for publishing guidance and mentions 'Read-only and unauthenticated,' but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any exclusion criteria.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: workflow, documentation retrieval, checklists, quickstart, SDK reference, planning, search, and config validation. No overlap.
Most tools follow verb_noun pattern with 'get_' prefix, but 'implementation_planner' deviates as a noun phrase, slightly reducing consistency.
8 tools is well-scoped for a documentation and planning assistant—not too few to cover needs, not too many to overwhelm.
The tool set comprehensively covers the stated domain: fetching docs, planning implementations, searching, and validating config. No obvious gaps for its read-only purpose.