spatial_infer_functional_zones

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

With no annotations, the description explicitly states the key safety behavior: it is local/read-only and does not mutate Unreal Editor state. This addresses the main risk an agent needs to know; return details are covered by the presence of an output schema.

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 compact and well-organized: purpose, KB pointer, behavioral scope, and a concrete example. It front-loads the core action and includes 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?

For a 10-parameter tool with zero parameter descriptions, the high-level guidance and example give a workable default path but leave important invocation details unstated. The KB link and output schema reduce the gap, but the missing parameter semantics make this only minimally complete.

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, but it only clarifies `room_analysis_json`, `detected_items_json`, `composition_plan_json`, and `requested_zones` (via the example and zone list). The remaining six parameters—`limit`, `room_type`, `room_origin`, `room_dimensions`, `min_zone_size_cm`, and `include_updated_room_analysis`—receive no explanation of meaning, format, or units.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource ('Infer usable functional zones') and enumerates the exact zone types it produces (kitchen, living, bedroom, entry, hallway, bathroom, utility). The phrase 'local/read-only planner... before prop generation or placement' sets it apart from the many mutation/placement siblings in the tool list.

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 a clear workflow cue: it consumes room analysis, screenshot detections, and/or an existing composition, and should run before prop generation or placement. It does not name alternative tools or state explicit when-not-to-use cases, but the context is sufficient for routing.

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