Retrieve Unity asset import status by ID, returning request ID, paths, geometry, bounds, scene placement, and errors.
Read Unity's receipt: request ID, asset paths, geometry, bounds, scene and errors.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| asset_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only operation ('Read') and mentions that errors are returned, but it omits permissions, rate limits, idempotency, and side-effect information.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words; the return fields are listed compactly.
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 description compensates for the absent output schema by enumerating return fields, but with no annotations and an undocumented required parameter, an agent still lacks enough context to call it correctly.
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% and the single required parameter asset_id is not described at all in the description. The description lists output fields instead of explaining what an asset_id is or its format.
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 states a specific verb 'Read' and names the resource 'Unity's receipt', then enumerates the receipt's fields. This is more specific than a tautology and approximates 'clear verb+resource+fields', but it does not distinguish this tool from sibling inspect_target or clarify what 'receipt' means in this context.
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, prerequisites, or alternatives. Sibling tools inspect_target/build_asset/publish_blend are not referenced, so the agent must infer the workflow.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.