ue_bp_add_custom_event

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the key constraint that custom events can only be added in event graphs and not functions. However, it does not disclose other behavioral aspects such as side effects, required permissions, or error conditions, so it is helpful 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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences that are front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or 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 tool with 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is too minimal. It lacks any explanation of the parameters, expected values, or what happens after adding the event. The description provides the essential scope but leaves significant gaps for an agent to operate 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%, and the description provides no information about any of the parameters (blueprint_path, event_name, graph_name, position). While the schema shows required fields and defaults, the description fails to compensate for the lack of parameter documentation, leaving the agent to infer meanings from the tool name alone.

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 verb 'Aggiunge' (adds) and the resource 'Custom Event', and further specifies that it only applies to event graphs, not functions. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ue_bp_add_function_graph.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Solo nei grafi evento: una funzione non può contenerne' (Only in event graphs: a function cannot contain one). This provides clear exclusions and context for appropriate usage.

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