create_render_target_2d_array

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnly=false, destructive=true), and the description adds material context beyond them: it deletes and rebuilds the existing asset on re-run, persits to disk, and surfaces save_error. Missing detail on default package path and permission requirements, but the destructive semantics are clearly disclosed.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then the mechanic, then format values, then the return shape. Dense but every clause (rebuild behavior, format list, return keys) adds information; slight verbosity in the inline return block.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by inlining the full return shape including the optional save_error, and covers format options and destructive re-run behavior. Everything needed to invoke and interpret results is present.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds the concrete format enum values (B8G8R8A8, FloatRGBA, RGBA32F, R16F) that the schema only vaguely calls "EPixelFormat name", plus confirms SizeX/SizeY/Slices/Format mapping to Init.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Creates a persisted UTextureRenderTarget2DArray") and distinguishes it from its 2D and cube siblings by naming the array asset type and the underlying Init/Format signature. An agent can identify the tool without opening the schema.

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 the create-and-save mechanic and the delete/rebuild behavior on re-run, which implies when it is appropriate. However, it never explicitly contrasts with create_render_target_2d, create_render_target_cube, or create_texture_2d_array, leaving sibling selection to inference.

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