unity_search_by_component

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 discloses what the tool returns (paths and instance IDs) but does not mention performance implications, error handling, or whether it searches inactive objects (though includeInactive param exists). It is adequate but not rich.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and efficiently conveys functionality and output. 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 no output schema, the description explains return values. Parameter descriptions are thorough. However, it does not differentiate from sibling search tools, which could be improved. Overall, it is fairly complete for a focused search tool.

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%, but the description adds value by providing concrete examples for componentType ('Rigidbody', 'Camera', etc.) and practical guidance for limit ('Use lower values on large scenes') and port (get from unity_select_instance). This goes beyond the 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 and returns paths and instance IDs. It uses a specific verb (Find) and resource (GameObjects with component type), distinguishing it from sibling tools like unity_search_by_name.

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 implies usage for searching by component type but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like unity_search_by_name or unity_search_by_layer. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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