get_skeletal_mesh_morph_targets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint/openWorldHint=false, so safety needs no repetition. The description earns credit by disclosing the return payload (per-target name, has_valid_data, num_deltas_lod0), which annotations cannot convey and which tells the agent what data it gets back without a second call.

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?

Two compact lines: the purpose first, then the literal return shape. No filler, nothing to trim, and the most load-bearing information is front-loaded.

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, so the inline return-shape disclosure does real work and covers what the tool yields. What remains missing is routing context against sibling morph-target tools, which is a usage gap rather than an incompleteness of the operation's description.

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?

There is one required parameter whose schema description coverage is 100% ('Content path to the skeletal mesh asset'), so the schema already carries the semantics. The description adds nothing about path format or failure modes, which is the correct baseline for fully documented parameters.

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 (get) and resource (morph targets on a skeletal mesh) plus the scope detail 'with delta counts'. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the close sibling get_morph_target_deltas, so an agent must infer the boundary, but the operation itself is unambiguous.

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 when-to-use guidance at all. The description never says how this differs from get_morph_target_deltas (per-target deltas) or get_skeletal_mesh_info, which are the natural alternatives in this namespace, nor does it state prerequisites.

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