get_landscape_material

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower, but the description adds genuinely non-obvious context: it is a direct UPROPERTY read, returns null when unset, and — critically — reports only the ALandscape actor so proxy copies are missed on World-Partition maps. That scoping caveat is real behavioral disclosure beyond the annotations.

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 purpose, then the World-Partition caveat, then the explicit Returns shape. Every sentence carries weight, though the proxy sentence is dense and could be split for readability.

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, but the description supplies the return shape (landscape_name, material_path, hole_material_path) and the key caveat. For a single-param read tool this is essentially complete; only the ambiguous proxy-reading instruction leaves a small gap.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single optional param (landscape_name, defaulting to first found) is already documented there. The description adds no syntax or format detail for the parameter itself, so the 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 (Read) and resource (the landscape's assigned render and hole material), and explicitly frames itself as 'the read-back oracle for set_landscape_material'. An agent can distinguish it from set_landscape_material, get_landscape_info, and get_actor_material_info immediately.

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?

Names the sibling relationship (the oracle counterpart to set_landscape_material) and gives explicit context for the World-Partition case, instructing the agent to also read landscape_material on streaming proxies. Clear when-to-use, though there is no explicit 'when not to use' statement and the proxy reference is slightly ambiguous.

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