unity_list_advanced_tools

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly describes the behavior: what each mode returns (matching tools, tools with parameter names, full schema, category counts) and implies it is lightweight by saying 'without loading full schemas'. It does not mention side effects or destructive actions, but as a read-only discovery tool, that is sufficient.

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 that efficiently conveys all modes and outcomes. It is front-loaded with the main purpose ('Discover advanced Unity tools') and uses semicolons to organize different usage patterns. There is no redundancy or wasted words.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description fully explains what to expect from each mode: matching tools, tools with parameter names, full parameter schema, or category names with counts. It even provides example categories. This is complete for a tool of moderate complexity with 5 parameters and multiple modes.

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 parameter descriptions, but the description adds significant value by explaining how the parameters combine into modes (e.g., search keywords matching, category listing tools with briefs, tool returning full schema). This goes beyond the schema's individual parameter descriptions.

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 discovers advanced Unity tools and explains the different modes (search, category, tool, no args). It also distinguishes from the sibling unity_advanced_tool by noting that tools are executed via that tool. This provides a specific verb and resource, leaving no ambiguity.

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 explains when to use each mode: search for keywords, category for tools list, tool for full schema, no args for categories. It also advises against using includeSchemas with category for full schemas and recommends tool= for one. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare it to other listing tools, though few exist.

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