get_onboarding_context

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it returns a curated packet and references a specific KB file, which is helpful. However, it does not state whether the tool is read-only, what the output structure looks like, or any potential failure modes. For a simple retrieval tool this is acceptable but not exhaustive.

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 description is succinct, uses a bullet list for supported tasks, and includes a clear example. Every sentence contributes useful information without redundancy.

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 tool with a single parameter, an explicit list of valid values, an example, and an output schema, the description is fully sufficient. The agent knows exactly what to pass and what to expect, and the KB reference adds depth. No additional context is needed.

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?

The schema provides no description for the 'task' parameter (0% coverage), so the description fully compensates by listing the valid task domains and showing an example call. This gives the agent everything needed to supply a correct parameter 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?

The description clearly states the tool returns a curated knowledge-base packet for a specific Unreal task domain, and enumerates the supported tasks (blueprints, animation, ai, etc.). This makes the purpose unambiguous and distinguishes it from the many action-oriented sibling tools.

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?

The description implies when to use it (when needing onboarding context for a task domain) but does not explicitly state alternatives or when not to use it. The example gives a concrete usage pattern, but no explicit guidance on selecting this tool over others.

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