Save raw packages

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the copy operation and default output location (Downloads folder), which is helpful, but does not mention whether existing files are overwritten, whether directories are created, or any side effects. It adds some context but not rich behavioral detail.

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 command and purpose, and contains no filler. Every clause adds useful information about what the tool does and its default behavior.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description covers the core purpose and output location, while the schema handles parameter details. It does not explain the return format or mention the need for a game tag (though the schema does), but for a simple copy operation it is sufficiently complete.

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 schema already provides descriptions for 6 of 7 parameters (86% coverage), so the bar is low for additional meaning. The description adds a simplified note about the default output (Downloads folder), which largely mirrors the schema's more detailed 'session outputDir or Downloads/umodel-export'. No substantial new parameter semantics are provided.

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 names the exact command ('umodel -save'), states the specific action (copy raw package files), and lists the file types (.upk/.uasset + .uexp/.ubulk). It clearly distinguishes this from siblings like umodel_export by emphasizing 'without converting'.

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 provides a concrete use case ('to unpack a cooked game without converting') and implies that conversion tools are alternatives. It doesn't explicitly name a sibling tool as the alternative, but the 'without converting' phrase offers clear contextual guidance.

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