unity_component_get_referenceable

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions returning scene objects and project assets filtered by type, but does not detail whether the tool modifies state (likely read-only), error behavior, pagination, or performance. The description could be more transparent about these aspects.

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 three sentences: purpose, return content, and usage advice. It is front-loaded with the main action and contains no extraneous words. Every sentence adds value.

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 has 6 parameters and no output schema. The description explains what is returned ('matching scene objects and project assets filtered by the expected type') but does not describe the structure of the output or details like default maxResults. Given the moderate complexity, the description is mostly sufficient but could be slightly more comprehensive.

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 coverage is 100% with all six parameters described. The description adds minimal parameter meaning beyond the schema; it provides context about the return value but does not elaborate on parameters. Baseline for high schema coverage is 3.

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's purpose: 'Discover what objects can be assigned to an ObjectReference property.' It specifies the verb 'discover', the resource 'objects', and the context of ObjectReference properties. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like unity_component_set_reference and unity_component_get_properties by focusing on querying available objects before wiring.

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 says 'Useful before wiring references to know what's available,' which clearly indicates when to use this tool (before setting references). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or list alternatives among siblings.

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