ue_build_start

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the build runs in background, requires editor closed, and force is only for stuck builds. However, it does not explicitly mention what happens if a build is already running without force (implied it won't start) or potential side effects like blocking.

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?

Well-structured with a summary line, context block, and Args section. While detailed, the Args section repeats parameter names. Occasional redundancy, but overall efficient and front-loaded.

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 6 parameters, 1 required, no output schema, and a sibling for status, the description covers the complete workflow: prerequisites, parameter usage, and follow-up actions. It even suggests using ue_build_status to poll for completion.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It explains each parameter: uproject (path), engine_version (force version), target (default <Project>Editor), configuration (Development/DebugGame/Shipping), engine_root (when not registered), and force (only when stuck). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema types.

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 it starts compilation of the C++ module in the background. It uses a specific verb ('Avvia la compilazione') and resource ('modulo C++ del progetto'). It distinguishes from siblings like ue_build_status and ue_live_compile by specifying the workflow.

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?

Provides explicit when-not: 'L'editor deve essere chiuso' and explains the typical sequence (ue_editor_close -> ue_build_start -> ue_build_status -> ue_editor_open). It also warns about Live Coding limitations and when to use the force parameter.

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