get_data_table_row_as_json

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive annotations, the description discloses concrete behavioral traits: it emits GameplayTagContainers in the ExportText form the importer accepts, and notably that the round trip is NOT lossless for multi-word user-defined enums, advising re-reading after writing. That caveat is exactly the non-obvious behavior an agent needs.

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-loads the core action and usage condition, then the caveat; the Returns line is compact. Slightly dense with a mildly redundant 'read half of a copy/duplicate/round-trip' clause, but no significant waste.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description enumerates the return shape (table_path, row_name, row_struct, row_json, row_data), covers the round-trip contract, and flags the lossy-enum limitation. Complete for an agent to call and interpret it correctly.

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 table_path and row_name are already fully documented. The description reinforces single-row scope ('ONE DataTable row') but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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+resource (export ONE DataTable row as JSON via UE's own writer) and explicitly distinguishes itself from both get_data_table_row and set_data_table_row_from_json. An agent can identify the tool and its role without opening any 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?

Explicitly names the alternative ('Use it over get_data_table_row when the value has to go back INTO the engine') and gives the selecting condition. It also frames the read-half-of-round-trip workflow, so when-to-use is unambiguous.

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