unity_search_by_layer

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the basic function, omitting any behavioral traits such as performance implications, side effects (e.g., does it modify the scene?), or return format. This leaves the agent uninformed about important behavioral 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately concise, but could be more informative without sacrificing brevity. The structure is good, but the content is minimal.

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 tool has 3 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is too minimal. It fails to explain what the tool returns, how to interpret results, or any edge cases. An agent needs more context to use it effectively.

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%, so the input schema already documents all parameters. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, as it does not provide additional meaning or clarification for the parameters. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate given high coverage.

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 'Find all GameObjects on a specific layer' uses a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('GameObjects on a specific layer'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like unity_search_by_component, unity_search_by_tag, and unity_search_by_name, which search by different criteria.

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 this tool versus alternatives. The description implies usage for layer-based searches, but does not provide when-not-to-use or mention alternative tools. Without such context, an AI agent may not select it correctly among similar search tools.

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