list_assets_modified_since

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/non-open-world, so the bar is lower; the description still adds real value by disclosing that it walks the filesystem rather than the registry, which is why it surfaces just-migrated assets. It also embeds a return shape, useful since no output schema exists.

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 verb and resource, and every clause (mtime semantics, Migrate/session use, registry gap) earns its place. Slightly dense with parentheticals and an inline Returns block, but nothing is wasted.

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?

For a read-only list tool with full schema coverage, complete annotations, and an embedded return shape, an agent has everything needed to select and call it correctly. The only minor gap is lack of pagination/ordering guidance beyond the limit parameter.

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%, so the schema already documents path, limit, timestamp, and the asset_path alias including mtime-strict-greater semantics. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, 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 (List), resource (package files .uasset/.umap), and precise scope (on-disk mtime newer than a timestamp). It explicitly distinguishes itself from registry-based siblings by noting it enumerates the filesystem and returns /Game package names.

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?

Frames the tool as 'the find -newermt recipe for isolating an UE Migrate set or a session's changes', giving clear context for when to reach for it, and implicitly contrasts with the registry that 'may not have indexed yet'. No explicit when-not or named alternative tool, so not a 5.

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