set_decal_sort_order

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=true, so the safety/mutation profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by explaining the ordering semantics, but does not cover failure modes (e.g. an actor with no decal component) or any scoping/permission context.

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 sentences, purpose front-loaded, no filler. The return-shape line is justified because no output schema exists.

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?

With no output schema, documenting the return shape is valuable, and the setter is simple with full schema coverage plus annotations. Only minor gaps remain, such as preconditions (target must have a decal component) and valid value ranges.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine meaning beyond the schema's terse 'New sort order value.' by explaining that lower values draw first within the decal bucket, which is the key semantic an agent needs to pick a value.

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 (the SortOrder int on a UDecalComponent) and even clarifies the semantics of the value ('lower draws first within the same decal bucket'). It is clearly distinct from other decal setters, but it does not explicitly name a sibling or contrast itself with one, which keeps it at a 4.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer you call this when you want to reorder decal draw order, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative (e.g. material or bucket selection) guidance. Adequate but with a clear gap.

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