ue_save_all

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that only unsaved changes (dirty packages) are saved and specifies scope (open level, modified assets). However, it omits details on whether the operation is blocking, may fail, or has side effects, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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 sentence of 11 words conveys the tool's purpose and scope efficiently. No redundant words or details. Front-loaded with the core action 'Save all dirty packages'.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers what it does. It could mention return behavior or failure modes, but for a simple save operation, the information provided is sufficient for an agent to understand its effect.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4. The description does not add parameter-specific information, but none is needed. It still provides behavioral context beyond 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 clearly states the tool saves 'dirty packages' and specifies it saves the open level and modified assets. This verb-resource combination is distinct from siblings like ue_delete_asset or ue_new_level, making purpose unambiguous.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While siblings don't include other save tools, the description lacks context on prerequisites or situations where using this tool is appropriate.

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