get_namespace

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does state the return content (namespace plus using directive) and implies a read-only lookup, but says nothing about behavior when the name is ambiguous, not found, or a member of multiple types.

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 purpose and usage in the first two sentences, then a compact Args block. The Args line slightly restates the schema's parameter name, but the added examples earn their place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required; between the purpose, the when-to-use sentence, and the parameter examples, an agent has everything needed to call this single-parameter lookup correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: it defines 'name' as a class or member name and supplies three concrete Unity examples ('SceneManager', 'NavMeshAgent', 'Rigidbody') that clarify the expected input shape.

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 ('Find') and a precise resource ('the correct namespace and using directive for a Unity class or member'), which an agent can act on without opening the schema. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like get_class_reference or search_unity_api, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Explicitly names the triggering condition: 'Use this when you need to know which namespace to import for a Unity type.' That is clear context for invocation, but it offers no exclusions or named alternatives among the sibling tools (e.g. when to prefer search_unity_api instead).

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