set_actor_replicates

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (destructive, idempotent, not read-only), and the description adds substantial extra context beyond them: the underlying AActor::SetReplicates also sets RemoteRole, only the placed instance is affected, the actor is not marked dirty, and nothing is saved. These are non-obvious behavioral traits 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?

The first sentence front-loads the core action and scope, then adds caveats about dirty/save state, and closes with the read-back pointer and a return shape. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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?

Although no output schema is defined, the description supplies the return shape ({ actor_label, replicates }), the read-back tool, and the mutation's persistence behavior. An agent has everything needed to invoke and interpret it.

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%, with both parameters fully documented, so the schema carries the meaning. The description's note that 'replicates echoes the request' concerns the return value rather than adding new parameter semantics, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (Set) and resource (bReplicates on an editor-world actor found by label), and explicitly scopes it to a placed instance rather than class defaults. This differentiates it from class-level siblings like set_bp_class_replication and set_component_replication.

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?

Gives clear context (only the placed instance changes, not class defaults) which routes the agent away from class-level replication tools, and names get_actor_replication_info as the read-back path. It stops short of explicitly stating when to prefer this over configure_replication, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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