unity_search_by_component

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavior. It states it searches the scene and returns paths and instance IDs, which is transparent. No destructive behavior is implied.

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?

Two concise sentences that front-load the core purpose and output, with no unnecessary 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?

Given the simple tool purpose and full schema coverage, the description is complete. It explains what it does, what it returns, and the parameters are self-explanatory via schema.

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 100% coverage, providing descriptions for all four parameters. The description adds context by mentioning 'paths and instance IDs' as output, but the schema already fully documents parameters. Score is slightly above baseline due to the clarity of the description reinforcing 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 finds GameObjects with a specific component type, specifying the action (Find all GameObjects), resource (scene), and result (returns paths and instance IDs). It is distinct from sibling tools like unity_search_by_name, unity_search_by_layer, etc.

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 implicitly conveys when to use this tool (to find objects by component type) versus alternatives like search_by_name or search_by_tag. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or specific alternatives.

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