unity_hub_list_editors

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It describes a read-only listing without side effects, which is appropriate for a simple tool. Could explicitly mention no modifications, but it's clear enough.

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 sentence (12 words) with no fluff. Every word adds value, clearly stating the action and result.

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 no output schema, the description mentions installation paths, which is useful. For a simple list tool, it's sufficiently complete, though it could hint at the output format (e.g., list of version and path objects).

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?

No parameters exist in the input schema, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly communicates that no inputs are needed, aligning with 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 lists installed Unity Editor versions with installation paths. It uses a specific verb (List) and resource (Unity Editor versions), distinguishing it from siblings like unity_hub_install_editor or unity_hub_available_releases.

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 explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives (e.g., unity_hub_get_install_path for a specific path, unity_hub_available_releases for available versions). Usage is implied but not clarified.

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